Ryan to pass on 2016 presidential race?

posted at 8:41 am on December 18, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Most people viewed the budget deal crafted by Paul Ryan and Patty Murray in the context of the Republican presidential nomination in 2016, but that group may not have included Paul Ryan. After a solid campaign performance as Mitt Romney’s running mate in 2012, the assumption was that Ryan wanted to take a shot at the top spot in the next opportunity.  The Hill’s Russell Berman talked to Ryan’s colleagues on Capitol Hill, who believe Ryan has other plans in mind:

In interviews The Hill conducted with more than two dozen House Republicans from across the ideological spectrum over the last couple of weeks, many of Ryan’s colleagues said they are doubtful he will run for president in 2016. Most believe that concerns for his young family will lead him to lay claim to the job he’s always wanted: chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. …

The eight-term legislator has long made it clear, both in occasional public comments and privately to colleagues, that the job he wants most is Ways and Means, where he could turn his controversial, nonbinding budgets into authorizing legislation reforming the tax code and the safety net programs of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

Ryan on Tuesday told The Wall Street Journal that he plans to lead the Ways and Means Committee in the next Congress.

The current chairman, Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.), will be term-limited out of the post in early 2015, and the consensus is it is Ryan’s for the taking. The post is big enough that it is unlikely Ryan would be able to lead the panel and run for higher office at the same time.

In his WSJ interview, Ryan confirmed his ambitions at Ways and Means. But that doesn’t mean it’s his for the asking:

The top job on Ways and Means would present major distractions, and potential pitfalls, for anyone seeking higher office. But it could also provide a platform for Republican messaging on economic issues as Democrats maintain a focus on issues of economic inequality. Success with a tax overhaul could also further burnish Mr. Ryan’s credentials as someone who can work across the aisle at a time of intense partisan gridlock.

Ways and Means has broad jurisdiction over many of the nation’s most important but difficult policy problems, from tax and trade policy to Social Security, Medicare and social services. It is the oldest committee in Congress. Its current leaders, particularly Mr. Camp, are eager to move a tax overhaul that would lower rates for individuals and corporations while closing loopholes, in order to generate growth and make the system simpler and fairer. In the interview, Mr. Ryan said those would be his priorities as well.

Many Democrats believe such changes would make the tax system less fair, not more. Some also question whether the changes would produce much growth. President Barack Obama has showed little interest in overhauling individual rates, and sharply criticized Mitt Romney’s tax-cut plan in 2012.

The Republicans have established term limits in the House that require each chairman to relinquish the gavel after six years. And Mr. Ryan may have some competition for the job. A spokeswoman for Texas Rep. Kevin Brady, who has more seniority on Ways and Means than Mr. Ryan, said he plans to seek the chairmanship when Mr. Camp vacates the job. But Mr. Ryan’s fundraising prowess and stature in the party would make him an overwhelming favorite to succeed Mr. Camp.

For Ryan, it may come down to choosing the most effective means to improving policy. He could try to make a quixotic run for the GOP nomination in 2016 while several governors — including his own — will make much more realistic and competitive candidates for the post, while having to protect his prospects by not doing much of anything for the next few years.  The other option will be to reposition himself to quarterback real tax reform in the House while the Republicans take control of the Senate in 2014 and hopefully the White House in 2016 to make substantive reforms possible.

At 43, he can choose later to run for governor or Senator as a more-realistic springboard to the presidency with that kind of solid reform on his record. At his age, this is not an either-or proposition, and there are different ways (and means) to get to the same end goal.


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

Ryan to pass on 2016 presidential race?

He may as well pass. He’s already lost. The same goes for Rubio.

cajunpatriot on December 18, 2013 at 8:45 AM

while having to protect his prospects by not doing much of anything for the next few years

Or as I like to say: Doing what he’s been doing since taking office.

Bishop on December 18, 2013 at 8:45 AM

Paul Ryan is a sellout, but he ain’t stupid. He has to know he already had an extremely slim chance at the nomination in 2016 and that was before he co-sponsored that POS tax and spend bill.

Doughboy on December 18, 2013 at 8:47 AM

Perhaps Ryan(spit) should head the Ministry Of Truth?

Mr. Arrogant on December 18, 2013 at 8:47 AM

Doesn’t seem like you could have both Ryan and Scott Walker coming out of Wisconsin to run for president anyway. But I suspect Ryan’s going to withhold any final decision until he sees if Walker wins re-election next November, since his candidacy would be dependent on running as a governor who could stand up to unions and other Democratic Party special interests and win a second term in office.

jon1979 on December 18, 2013 at 8:49 AM

After a solid an invisible campaign performance as Mitt Romney’s running mate in 2012

FIFY.

Stoic Patriot on December 18, 2013 at 8:52 AM

Good idea. No sense in wasting time and money.

Charlemagne on December 18, 2013 at 8:52 AM

How long has Ryan been in DC?

Paul Davis Ryan is an American politician and member of the Republican Party who has served as the United States Representative for Wisconsin’s 1st congressional district since 1999 and as Chairman of the House Budget Committee since 2011.

2013 – 1999 = 14

*buzzer*

Sorry, Tooter. “Twizzle, Twazzle, Twozzle, Twome; time for this one to come home.”

Fallon on December 18, 2013 at 8:56 AM

I wouldn’t vote for him, the jackwagon.
Rubio better not run either, the treasonous amnesty lover.

Darksean on December 18, 2013 at 8:57 AM

It would be shame if he did. Ryan is one of the few grown ups left in DC. However, whether he runs or not he will continue to have a large impact for the better.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 8:57 AM

Ryan = garbage. These criminals vote to cut veteran benefits while keeping aid to illegals.

Ministry of Truth comment: +1

LaughterJones on December 18, 2013 at 8:59 AM

Bishop on December 18, 2013 at 8:45 AM

If, by “doing nothing” you mean crafting the only budgets that either house of Congress passed for the first 5 years of this administration, running for VP and proposing solutions to our entitlement traps, then you would still be wrong. He has continued to be a strong force for improving the mess in DC. Often one of the extremely few voices of sanity in the entire town.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:00 AM

I don’t believe I’ll be losing my composure, over this.

listens2glenn on December 18, 2013 at 9:00 AM

I wouldn’t vote for him, the jackwagon.
Rubio better not run either, the treasonous amnesty lover.

Darksean on December 18, 2013 at 8:57 AM

I still think Rubio is gonna run. He’ll wind up dropping out early once he realizes the base has abandoned him, but based on the positions he’s taken since the amnesty debacle, it looks like he’s trying to get back in the good graces of conservatives which indicates interest in a 2016 run.

Doughboy on December 18, 2013 at 9:01 AM

I wouldn’t vote for him after his support of amnesty and hatred of military retirees. That he would attack military retirees (including those disabled in combat) for a paltry $6B while upholding tax credits for illegal aliens is beyond reprehensible. Illegals are parasites. The nation owes disabled military retirees more than a boot to the face. Yet Ryan and the GOP leadership are more concerned about pandering to the groups that support the parasites.

Happy Nomad on December 18, 2013 at 9:04 AM

Ryan/Rubio are in the same boat with the base.

Valiant on December 18, 2013 at 9:05 AM

Doughboy on December 18, 2013 at 9:01 AM

I don’t think that the primaries are going to go anything like the majority at H/A want and predict (invariably one and the same thing). I think that the influence of “the base” is on the decline. People are becoming much more interested in winning and fixing problems than they are in purity and ideology.

The purists are constantly on the lookout for reasons to NOT vote for this or that candidate. Every issue is a pass/fail, black/white litmus test of paramount importance. I think that most people are sick of it and just want to see movement in the right direction. They are not seeking to make perfection the enemy of good enough.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:05 AM

I’m a military retiree and I’ll not forget the ones who support this budget deal. I’m learning this morning that disabled veterans are NOT exempt from it. Pretty disgusting when you consider all the other places they could have gotten this money, and all the fraud and waste that is currently in government.

TarheelBen on December 18, 2013 at 9:07 AM

Gee, I’m devastated. How could you deny us your steely leadership and terrier-like dedication to conservatism, Paul. I guess I’ll have to settle for Ted Cruz.

rrpjr on December 18, 2013 at 9:07 AM

I think Ryan sees a mission before him – as head of the Ways and Means Committee – he sees a way to make an impact.

Rather than knee-jerk and slam the man – I am open to his future.

He’s a good man – the GOP is lucky to have him.

jake-the-goose on December 18, 2013 at 9:07 AM

I still think Rubio is gonna run. He’ll wind up dropping out early once he realizes the base has abandoned him, but based on the positions he’s taken since the amnesty debacle, it looks like he’s trying to get back in the good graces of conservatives which indicates interest in a 2016 run.

Doughboy on December 18, 2013 at 9:01 AM

Rubio is trying to mend fences with the base after becoming BFFs with Schumer and McCain over amnesty. It is clearly a ploy to do damage control ahead of the 2016 elections. Fortunately, he showed his cards early and there are other possible candidates who did not sell out to the enemy the first time the national spotlight shined in their direction.

Happy Nomad on December 18, 2013 at 9:07 AM

We in the GOP needs to look to our Governors for POTUS.

The House and Senate are not the source of our leaders – they are the source of our problems.

jake-the-goose on December 18, 2013 at 9:08 AM

It would be nice to have a post on who the people ahead of him are and what their records indicate they might do. I don’t trust Ryan to do the right thing because, well, he hasn’t done the right thing many times before, so why would I laud his desire to have such power that the Chairmanship of Ways and Means provides.

Dusty on December 18, 2013 at 9:10 AM

After a solid campaign performance as Mitt Romney’s running mate in 2012

Um, is it Opposite Day or something? Hey Ryan: Golf. Foxtrot. Yankee.

Nutstuyu on December 18, 2013 at 9:10 AM

The House and Senate are not the source of our leaders – they are the source of our problems.

jake-the-goose on December 18, 2013 at 9:08 AM

May I embroider that on a pillow?

Fallon on December 18, 2013 at 9:12 AM

I don’t think that the primaries are going to go anything like the majority at H/A want and predict (invariably one and the same thing). I think that the influence of “the base” is on the decline. People are becoming much more interested in winning and fixing problems than they are in purity and ideology.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:05 AM

Hey, I’d like to win too. The problem is what we keep being told is a winning formula(the moderate, electable type) winds up being a big loser every time out. And it’s looking like we’re about to see the same song and dance all over again. Chris CRISTie will be sold to us as the best candidate and we’ll be told by the elites to get in line and support him for the sake of winning. Which makes sense. I mean last time we nominated a centrist, Northeastern Republican whose claim to fame was being elected Governor in a blue state, that worked out great, right?

Doughboy on December 18, 2013 at 9:13 AM

I still think Rubio is gonna run. He’ll wind up dropping out early once he realizes the base has abandoned him, but based on the positions he’s taken since the amnesty debacle, it looks like he’s trying to get back in the good graces of conservatives which indicates interest in a 2016 run.

Doughboy on December 18, 2013 at 9:01 AM

Rubio’s problem is the amnesty issue is likely to come back in 2014, and quite possibly in 2015 as well if it fails again next year. He can’t escape that, can’t get to the right of other possible Senate candidates for president like Paul and Cruz and would come across as a John Kerry “I was for immigration reform before I was against it” flip-flopper if he so obviously reverses his stance on the issue just to position himself for the 2016 campaign.

jon1979 on December 18, 2013 at 9:14 AM

I’m a military retiree and I’ll not forget the ones who support this budget deal. I’m learning this morning that disabled veterans are NOT exempt from it. Pretty disgusting when you consider all the other places they could have gotten this money, and all the fraud and waste that is currently in government.

TarheelBen on December 18, 2013 at 9:07 AM

Ryan was very dismissive of his boot-to-the-face of military retirees. Apparently we are all undeserving of COA because we have a post-military job.

That is reprehensible enough an attitude but the fact that they didn’t even exempt disabled combat-wounded retirees is beyond words I can post here without being banned. Exemptions for disabled retirees was part of the legislation at one point. Was Ryan the one who removed the provision in order to “save” more money on the backs of military retirees? Given Ryan’s comments on Sunday, I’d bet it was indeed Paul Ryan.

BTW, all this is for a $6B savings over 10 years. Not chump change but hardly a large enough amount that savings could not be found elsewhere. That’s $600M a year. How about dumping the illegals and other parasites from food stamp fraud for starters?

Happy Nomad on December 18, 2013 at 9:14 AM

Dusty on December 18, 2013 at 9:10 AM

Here’s one example: When running with Mitt, he proposed putting a cap on deductions from all sources in exchange for income lower tax rates. This was a brilliant move because it takes the battles over which deductions to kill out of the equation. Rather than fighting this interest group or the other one to allow us to make our tax code flatter, it accomplishes the mission in one step.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:14 AM

It’s all about the ‘weighting’ betwixt narcissism and greed in your personal political bag of character defects-
With Obama, narcissism has primacy- he had to run for President. Paulie “The Fixer” Ryan is more interested in the final payoff beyond public office. But while in office he has to display ruthlessness and the ability to exploit every connection, which tranlates to selling drowning his constituency down in the river like so many unwanted kittens in a burlap sack.

M240H on December 18, 2013 at 9:16 AM

WTH happened to Ryan ????

stenwin77 on December 18, 2013 at 9:16 AM

He’s a good man – the GOP is lucky to have him.

jake-the-goose on December 18, 2013 at 9:07 AM

Har, har, har. A “good man”. Who gives a sh*t. I’m a good man. So are you, I’m sure. So are plenty of people. It doesn’t mean sh*t right now. We need ruthless fighters — warriors who understand the Left and know how to fight it. This Howdy-Doody marionette pu*z got rolled by Joe Biden — Joe Biden! — in the most important moment of his life in the greatest political conflict of our time against the most poisonous administration in history. Epic fail — epic. It disaqualifies him from EVER running again. How long did he have to prepare, how much evidence did he need about who he was fighting and what he would face. And yet he sat there and smiled like a scared stiff as his ticket, his party, his chances and his country were trashed by the most notorious lightweight gaffe-tastic sc*mbag in the democrat party.

A “nice guy.” Har, har, f*cking har.

rrpjr on December 18, 2013 at 9:17 AM

Rubio’s problem is the amnesty issue is likely to come back in 2014, and quite possibly in 2015 as well if it fails again next year. He can’t escape that, can’t get to the right of other possible Senate candidates for president like Paul and Cruz and would come across as a John Kerry “I was for immigration reform before I was against it” flip-flopper if he so obviously reverses his stance on the issue just to position himself for the 2016 campaign.

jon1979 on December 18, 2013 at 9:14 AM

Rubio’s biggest nightmare with regard to his 2016 prospects is amnesty actually passing in the House. At least if it fails or never even comes up for a vote in that chamber, he can attempt to distance himself from the Gang of Eight bill over the next few years. But if any kind of immigration legislation makes it out of the House, Rubio will be given the “credit” and he’ll never live that down.

Doughboy on December 18, 2013 at 9:19 AM

I wouldn’t vote for him after his support of amnesty and hatred of military retirees. That he would attack military retirees (including those disabled in combat) for a paltry $6B while upholding tax credits for illegal aliens is beyond reprehensible. Illegals are parasites. The nation owes disabled military retirees more than a boot to the face. Yet Ryan and the GOP leadership are more concerned about pandering to the groups that support the parasites.

Happy Nomad on December 18, 2013 at 9:04 AM

+1
Thank you, you put that more succintly than I could.

M240H on December 18, 2013 at 9:20 AM

The purists are constantly on the lookout for reasons to NOT vote for this or that candidate. Every issue is a pass/fail, black/white litmus test of paramount importance. I think that most people are sick of it and just want to see movement in the right direction. They are not seeking to make perfection the enemy of good enough.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:05 AM

Purist, eh? This budget deal increases spending and taxes and blows through spending caps that were agreed on in 2011. This deal keeps us on a glide path to 25 trillion in debt. If you think promised spending cuts in the future are actually going to happen you’re out of your mind. There’s a reason why the Democrats are cheering this proposal and are all voting for it. Purist? Name me ONE thing about this deal that moves us in the “right direction.”

TarheelBen on December 18, 2013 at 9:21 AM

A good VP candidate?

He couldn’t even deliver his own state of Wisconsin to the Romney ticket. He got beat by Joe Biden in the debate. He hurt Romney with the ability to be mediocre at best.

portlandon on December 18, 2013 at 9:22 AM

TarheelBen on December 18, 2013 at 9:21 AM

It prevents Ted Cruz and his ilk from sh–ting the bed with another shutdown for a while. It also is a real, live budget which will pass both houses, for the first time in 5 years. The first step to managing our budgets is to have, you know, a budget! By avoiding passage of a budget for all of these years, we have been living with continuations of the Pelosi budget.

Is this a great budget? Is it even a good budget? Is it a not so sh-tty budget? Hell NO! However, it is an improvement over what we had.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:26 AM

I can’t imagine why he’s

ToddPA on December 18, 2013 at 9:27 AM

Delusional

Bmore on December 18, 2013 at 9:27 AM

Here’s one example: When running with Mitt, he proposed putting a cap on deductions from all sources in exchange for income lower tax rates. This was a brilliant move because it takes the battles over which deductions to kill out of the equation. Rather than fighting this interest group or the other one to allow us to make our tax code flatter, it accomplishes the mission in one step.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:14 AM

President Romney thought that was brilliant also.

portlandon on December 18, 2013 at 9:31 AM

Is this a great budget? Is it even a good budget? Is it a not so sh-tty budget? Hell NO! However, it is an improvement over what we had.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:26 AM

Actually it’s not. At least the CRs kept the sequester intact. This budget gave that up and got nothing in return.

Doughboy on December 18, 2013 at 9:32 AM

It prevents Ted Cruz and his ilk from sh–ting the bed with another shutdown for a while.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:26 AM

So that’s it then. Not what’s best for the country. We have to do what’s best politically for the ruling class in Washington. The Republicans are supporting this awful deal because they are scared to death of the media – and of Barack Obama.

TarheelBen on December 18, 2013 at 9:33 AM

I find this shocking!!

I mean, come on. Nothing sells in the GOP better than
a Uber Rino Moderate, who gets their lunch money stolen
from them by a Human Bed Sore (Patty Murray).

The man has NOMINEE written all over him!!

ToddPA on December 18, 2013 at 9:34 AM

Ryan and the country would be well served if he stays out of the presidential race in 2016, and 2020 and 2024, and …..

CatoRenasci on December 18, 2013 at 9:34 AM

I can’t imagine why he’s

ToddPA on December 18, 2013 at 9:27 AM

Not enough Coffee

ToddPA on December 18, 2013 at 9:35 AM

So that’s it then.

TarheelBen on December 18, 2013 at 9:33 AM

1. I gave you another reason as well, so no, that is not “it.”

2. What Cruz did was harmful to the country, so preventing a repeat is better for the country.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:36 AM

Is this a great budget? Is it even a good budget? Is it a not so sh-tty budget? Hell NO! However, it is an improvement over what we had.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:26 AM

Tell that to the 19-year-old who lost three limbs in Afghanistan being shortchanged while illegal aliens are getting tax breaks and GM isn’t being forced to pay back the $10B loss from bailing them out.

Happy Nomad on December 18, 2013 at 9:38 AM

Uselessness

Bmore on December 18, 2013 at 9:43 AM

Happy Nomad on December 18, 2013 at 9:38 AM

The GM loss is more worth being returned than is any other loss in equity value for any other shareholder.

“The deal cuts pension cost of living raises by 1 percentage point for military retirees who aren’t disabled and not yet 62 years old,” Liberto wrote last week.

I served and I know an awful lot of military retirees. They get a very good deal, retiring after 20 years and still in good position to get new jobs and so continuing to earn. This cut to benefit increases is pretty mild and nothing like the sob story you are peddling.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:44 AM

The GM loss is no (sic) more worth being returned than is any other loss in equity value for any other shareholder.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:44 AM

correction

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:46 AM

I still think Rubio is gonna run. He’ll wind up dropping out early once he realizes the base has abandoned him, but based on the positions he’s taken since the amnesty debacle, it looks like he’s trying to get back in the good graces of conservatives which indicates interest in a 2016 run.

Doughboy on December 18, 2013 at 9:01 AM

Jeb is running…Because Dynasty!

*blech*

workingclass artist on December 18, 2013 at 9:48 AM

The deal cuts pension cost of living raises by 1 percentage point for military retirees who aren’t disabled and not yet 62 years old,” Liberto wrote last week.

I served and I know an awful lot of military retirees. They get a very good deal, retiring after 20 years and still in good position to get new jobs and so continuing to earn. This cut to benefit increases is pretty mild and nothing like the sob story you are peddling.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:44 AM

The provision exempting disabled retirees was removed you idiot. You are deliberately lying as part of your concern trolling. And whether or not non-disabled retirees are “in good position” to absorb the cost, why should they bear the burden when illegals are getting tax credits, Congress exempts itself from Obamacare, and welfare fraud is running rampant. You really think that the government couldn’t find $600/year elsewhere.

But the biggest take away here is that you are a dishonest liar who continues to peddle the idea that disabled retirees are exempt from this attack when that is blatantly not true.

Happy Nomad on December 18, 2013 at 9:49 AM

rrpjr on December 18, 2013 at 9:17 AM

I like your clarity.

jake-the-goose on December 18, 2013 at 9:49 AM

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:44 AM

If you are a retiree at age 42, it will cost you about $124,000 over a 20-year period, until you reach age 62. And disabled veterans are NOT exempt from this. It’s pretty lousy when you consider all the different things they could have cut, including tax breaks for illegals.

http://freebeacon.com/disabled-military-retirees-not-exempt-from-pension-cuts-in-budget-deal/

TarheelBen on December 18, 2013 at 9:52 AM

Happy Nomad on December 18, 2013 at 9:49 AM

Name calling does you great honor. /s

We are talking about a 1% cut in the cost of living increase per year. This is minor. You are pettifogging this issue for dramatic effect.

Are there better places to cut? Yes, of course there are. Could anyone else from the right forge a better compromise? Not bloody likely.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:53 AM

Dammit, I just shiite in the bed again.

Bishop on December 18, 2013 at 9:54 AM

WTH happened to Ryan ????

Nothing really.
He’s been a professional pol since graduating college and has never held a real job in the private sector- A complete phoney. Ryan’s mask has dropped to reveal the establishment elitist within. No one should be surprised about this, Sakes, he ran with Romney.

PS: I think MJBrutus is actually Karl Rove.

Mr. Arrogant on December 18, 2013 at 9:54 AM

It’s pretty lousy when you consider all the different things they could have cut, including tax breaks for illegals.

TarheelBen on December 18, 2013 at 9:52 AM

The whole thing is lousy with concern trolls like MJBrutus lying his ass off about the truth.

Just heard one of my Senators essentially saying that they’d “fix it” later but they had to pass the budget now. In other words the filthy Democrat expects us to trust him even as he votes to penalize disabled military retirees for serving their nation.

Happy Nomad on December 18, 2013 at 9:56 AM

Mr. Arrogant on December 18, 2013 at 9:54 AM

I think that your handle suits you.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:56 AM

Happy Nomad on December 18, 2013 at 9:49 AM

Name calling does you great honor. /s

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:53 AM

Gawd how I love it when you get all twisted up about being insulted:

Screw you, azzhole.

MJBrutus on August 19, 2011 at 5:09 PM

That’s a helluva lot better than you, you scum sucking pig.

MJBrutus on May 9, 2011 at 8:46 AM

I say that most posters here are sub-moronic.

MJBrutus on May 9, 2011 at 12:46 PM

Bishop on December 18, 2013 at 9:58 AM

Happy Nomad on December 18, 2013 at 9:56 AM

Yes, yes. You keep calling me a liar, except that you know full well that I did not lie. I did not say that disabled vets were excluded, which seems to be the “lie” that you keep accusing me of. So keep calling me a liar, it serves to solidify the truth about yourself, not me.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:58 AM

We are talking about a 1% cut in the cost of living increase per year. This is minor. You are pettifogging this issue for dramatic effect.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:53 AM

Minor only because it doesn’t effect your paycheck you concern troll. Again tell that 19-year-old who was retired after losing three limbs that a 1% cut in his pay is minor and he is pettifogging.

And we haven’t even addressed the fact that this attack on retirees is a complete betrayal of what was promised when the signed up to serve their nation.

Happy Nomad on December 18, 2013 at 9:59 AM

Bishop on December 18, 2013 at 9:58 AM

Wow, 2011. Only 2 1/2 years old.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:59 AM

The current chairman, Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.), will be term-limited out of the post in early 2015, and the consensus is it is Ryan’s for the taking.

Wasn’t Ryan supposed to be term limited out of his budget committee chair position, but the GOP allowed him another term?

Interesting how the GOP allows him to benefit from not enforcing the term limits and now to potentially benefit by enforcing the term limits. The GOP and Ryan can’t even follow their own rules, no wonder why they are pushing amnesty.

weaselyone on December 18, 2013 at 10:03 AM

Why would anyone waste the money when the GOP establishment (Big Moneyed Corporations) have already picked Democrat Chris Christie for the Republican nomination?

magicbeans on December 18, 2013 at 10:03 AM

Bishop on December 18, 2013 at 9:58 AM

Wow, 2011. Only 2 1/2 years old.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:59 AM

Eh, those were the days when you weren’t a whiny hypocrite about insults and you went off on a regular basis. Now you get shut down and reminded of your hypocrisy before spouting off, and then you run for it before providing current material to prove everyone right.

Hey, you would make a good politician, you were for insulting other people before you were against it.

Bishop on December 18, 2013 at 10:04 AM

Too bad about Ryan. Early on in his career he actually showed a wee bit of promise. Now he is eager to reign, not represent.

Bmore on December 18, 2013 at 10:06 AM

Happy Nomad on December 18, 2013 at 9:59 AM

Let’s look at all the squishy RINO’s in the Senate who voted for the bill:

Lamar Alexander (TN)
Roy Blunt (MO)
Saxby Chambliss (GA)
Susan Collins (ME)
Jeff Flake (AZ)
Orrin Hatch (UT)
John Hoeven (ND)
Johnny Isakson (GA)
Ron Johnson (WI)
John McCain (AZ)
Lisa Murkowski (AK)
Rob Portman (OH)

We knew McCain was a big government lib, but who knew he hated disabled veterans?

I guess Chambliss, Flake, Hatch, Johnson and Portman are gonna have to turn in their conservative cards to the gatekeepers on their way out of the big tent. Turncoat, soldier hating bastards all! /s

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 10:06 AM

But yeah, Ryan can eat shiite with the rest of them, illegals get welfare benefits and men who have gone toe to toe with savages take the shaft.

You lefties make me ashamed that we share the same nation.

Bishop on December 18, 2013 at 10:08 AM

Now you get shut down and reminded of your hypocrisy before spouting off, and then you run for it before providing current material to prove everyone right.

Bishop on December 18, 2013 at 10:04 AM

Wow, that’s quite a Machiavellian, sneaky thing I’ve got going on.

Here’s theory 2: I simply don’t care to waste time exchanging insults with people I don’t know, don’t care about and never will.

I wonder which Sir William of Occam would choose?

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 10:08 AM

Here’s theory 2: I simply don’t care to waste time exchanging insults with people I don’t know, don’t care about and never will.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 10:08 AM

So you WERE for it before being against it.

You should apply for Kerry’s job.

Bishop on December 18, 2013 at 10:15 AM

Bishop on December 18, 2013 at 10:15 AM

Yep. I recognized my own foolishness and gave it up.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 10:16 AM

We knew McCain was a big government lib, but who knew he hated disabled veterans?

I guess Chambliss, Flake, Hatch, Johnson and Portman are gonna have to turn in their conservative cards to the gatekeepers on their way out of the big tent. Turncoat, soldier hating bastards all! /s

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 10:06 AM

I don’t believe you’re making light of this situation. This country is in serious trouble and you’re supporting a deal that screws over veterans, kicks the can down the road once again, and does nothing to address the deteriorating fiscal condition of this country.

TarheelBen on December 18, 2013 at 10:20 AM

I wonder which Sir William of Occam would choose?

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 10:08 AM

Your wife, like the rest of us did.

M240H on December 18, 2013 at 10:29 AM

I am sorry Paul Ryan. But you don’t get to crap all over disabled and retired veteran’s pensions while allowing the spending binge to continue then ask the American people to elect you president.

paulsur on December 18, 2013 at 10:31 AM

Here’s one example: When running with Mitt, he proposed putting a cap on deductions from all sources in exchange for income lower tax rates. This was a brilliant move because it takes the battles over which deductions to kill out of the equation. Rather than fighting this interest group or the other one to allow us to make our tax code flatter, it accomplishes the mission in one step.

[MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:14 AM]

LOL. Campaign talk. Anybody can say anything. The “litmus test” you like to denigrate, is what he does not what he says. After almost five full years of Obama, I cannot believe anyone, ANYONE, would judge a politician based on what the politician says, much less try to sell them to me on that basis.

The purists are constantly on the lookout for reasons to NOT vote for this or that candidate.

[MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:05 AM]

Wow wee! Purists doing something any intelligent person would do.

I’d rather lean purist than excusist. Let’s talk about the excusists, those who are constantly on the lookout for legitimate complaints about candidates so they can make excuses for their behavior regardless of how egregious the behavior is while offering the soporific defense the politician is going in the right direction, a bar so low anyone can step over it.

If anything, excusists do more damage to the party than purists do. Excusists send the message to politicians that whatever they decide, that then is the best they can do, because (fill-in-the-bank), which gives politicians free rein to do whatever they want because excusists will never hold them accountable for either what they say or what they do.

Dusty on December 18, 2013 at 10:35 AM

It’s good that he’s passing. One dem candidate per office is plenty.

voiceofreason on December 18, 2013 at 10:36 AM

I like your clarity.

jake-the-goose on December 18, 2013 at 9:49 AM

I appreciate it.

rrpjr on December 18, 2013 at 10:41 AM

An admission that stupid is what stupid does.Would have lost anyway.

redware on December 18, 2013 at 10:43 AM

Dusty on December 18, 2013 at 10:35 AM

Oh yes, I see. Weed them out, one vote at a time. Cast the wrong lever and you’re gone. Please tell me, how many “real” conservatives are left in Congress? Are there still enough to play bridge?

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 10:47 AM

Ryan to pass on 2016 presidential race?

…he’s not dumb!…he knows what he did!

KOOLAID2 on December 18, 2013 at 11:02 AM

Wow, 2011. Only 2 1/2 years old.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:59 AM

That’s how old you look when you throw your tantrums.

portlandon on December 18, 2013 at 11:14 AM

Where can he be most effective at spending more money, increasing taxes and pushing amnesty?

Clark1 on December 18, 2013 at 11:15 AM

Ryan isn’t a RINO, he’s a true *blue* Republican. He’s just not a real Conservative. He’s toast like Rubio.

Dandapani on December 18, 2013 at 11:16 AM

portlandon on December 18, 2013 at 11:14 AM

Yes. And it’s why I stopped. Self awareness is a wonderful thing :-)

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 11:19 AM

Any Republican that not only can’t get the military veteran vote, but instead would have them campaigning against them …. is toast.

Being an econ wonk does not make one eligible.

Besides, since 2008 there are a lot more of his votes than just this one that should have negated his candidacy.

If Romney weren’t from the same camp he would have seen that and known better.

Carnac on December 18, 2013 at 11:24 AM

After a solid campaign performance as Mitt Romney’s running mate in 2012, the assumption was that Ryan wanted to take a shot at the top spot in the next opportunity.

With all due respect, what exactly did he bring to the ticket? The one thing I was looking forward to when Ryan was selected was the VP debate, and to say that he underwhelmed would be an understatement. I don’t know if he hurt the ticket, but he certainly didn’t help.

GOPRanknFile on December 18, 2013 at 11:26 AM

NO!!!!!

We need a herd of RINOs running and one true conservative.

Just to split up the stupid vote.

Gunlock Bill on December 18, 2013 at 11:42 AM

GOPRanknFile on December 18, 2013 at 11:26 AM

In the Romney thread, you wrote:

Romney is a good man, and would have been a fine President. It’s too bad he lost, but he had his chance. He knows this better than anyone, and won’t run again.

I feel much the same about Ryan also. He didn’t bring enough politically. That’s a shame, because he would be great as a POTUS but I doubt he could win the office.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 11:44 AM

I feel much the same about Ryan also. He didn’t bring enough politically. That’s a shame, because he would be great as a POTUS but I doubt he could win the office.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 11:44 AM

It’s true. Romney is a good man, but a terrible politician. Ryan is a better politician than Romney (granted, that’s not much of a bar to clear), but he doesn’t really bring anything to the table to win the nomination. I do hope he runs for Governor or Senator one day, though.

GOPRanknFile on December 18, 2013 at 11:48 AM

Ugh. I wouldn’t vote for Paul Ryan for dogcatcher.

His theft of military retiree benefits was the last straw for me. The GOP is not getting my votes in 2014. I’m voting for TEA PARTY candidates. Period.

If you like your GOP LIBERAL ELITISTS YOU CAN KEEP YOUR GOP LIBERAL ELITISTS.

mountainaires on December 18, 2013 at 12:09 PM

I see him running for governor of Wisconsin in 2020.

BigWillieStyles on December 18, 2013 at 12:20 PM

We are talking about a 1% cut in the cost of living increase per year. This is minor. You are pettifogging this issue for dramatic effect.

Are there better places to cut? Yes, of course there are. Could anyone else from the right forge a better compromise? Not bloody likely.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 9:53 AM

If a military retiree retires at 42, then that’s 20 years of having their annual Cost of Living increase stolen from them; that means that just through inflation, they lose; but it also adds up to between $80,000 and $160,000 of retirement income.

You may be sanguine about that, but most people wouldn’t be so quick to call that a “minor” cut in benefits that were promised to them WHILE they were serving.

Moreover, those same military retirees took pay for 20 years over the course of their career that is on average 13% LESS than their civilian counterparts; they took that lower rate of pay because they were promised BENEFITS upon retirement. Those benefits have just been STOLEN from them. By the GOP and the Democrats working in collusion; further proof that RINOS are no better than Democrats.

So, if you think $80,000 to $160,000 is nothing, I suggest you donate that amount to Wounded Warrior Project. I assure you, THEY won’t think it’s a “minor” amount.

mountainaires on December 18, 2013 at 12:20 PM

Lord, we should be so lucky.

Schadenfreude on December 18, 2013 at 12:37 PM

I will vote for the “Rent is Too Damn High” guy before I vote for Ryan or anyone else who backed that budget. It isn’t even about the money, it is the principle of the whole thing. We signed a contract with them, and they are changing it after the fact. Cutting ANY amount from the pension of someone who has sacrificed to uphold their end of the bargain is wrong, especially disabled/medically retired vets. Yet the illegals get to keep their welfare tax loophole. It’s totally wrong.

Boudica on December 18, 2013 at 12:39 PM

Why does he need to be President when he’s doing a bang up job of destroying this country from the House. Obama wasn’t nearly as efficient when he was only in the Senate.

besser tot als rot on December 18, 2013 at 12:53 PM

People are becoming much more interested in winning and fixing problems than they are in purity and ideology.

MJBrutus

And that’s just one more reason why you’re a moron. Maybe you should become an Obama supporter(if we pretend you aren’t already, lol). He won after all, and now he is trying to fix problems. And you claim ideology doesn’t matter either, so why not? You must love Obamacare too. It was passed to try and fix a problem.

xblade on December 18, 2013 at 1:04 PM

xblade on December 18, 2013 at 1:04 PM

You’ve exceeded your daily quota of fallacies and non-sequiturs in that post alone. Sorry, there will be no further response to you.

MJBrutus on December 18, 2013 at 1:13 PM

People are becoming much more interested in winning and fixing problems than they are in purity and ideology.

MJBrutus

“Doing something” does not equal making things better. Most of these “fixes” make things worse. In such instances, the status quo is preferred. Further, “fixes” that makes things worse don’t help you win.

besser tot als rot on December 18, 2013 at 2:39 PM

Thank goodness.

Tax and spend democrats are hellish enough. We don’t need that reckless immorality on our side of the aisle.

Murphy9 on December 18, 2013 at 3:13 PM

Comment pages: 1 2