Thoughts on Paul Ryan?

Visitor (not verified)
anonymous user
Registered: 12-31-1969
Thoughts on Paul Ryan?
254
Mon, 08-13-2012 - 9:54am

I'm kind of new to iVillage, so I hope I'm posting in the right place!

I was just wondering what you think about Romney's VP choice.  I don't know a lot about Paul Ryan, so I don't have much of an opinion yet. 

Pages

Avatar for xxxs
Community Leader
Registered: 01-25-2010
Tue, 08-14-2012 - 10:45pm

I see Ryan as out of touch with working people's household economics.  His base is money with money which most people will not have any experience with.  However, I am equally annoyed at both parties for not getting to the issues.  I do not expect a president to provide jobs.  Employers provide jobs. In the US a consumer driven economy: needs the consumption to a point where more jobs are needed by the employers to get the products and services to customers.  Ryan does not seem to understand that relationship.

dragowoman

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2006
Tue, 08-14-2012 - 10:52pm
Every time I read "Ryan is an economist", my internal translator writes "Ryan is a politician".
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Tue, 08-14-2012 - 11:00pm

Eh? I NEVER ever said that those individuals worked for Fox. However, Fox made sure to give coverage to those individuals (using words like"catch" and/or quoting other .....wait for it.....conservative organizations bemoaning the "early sign of the negative coverage the Wisconsin congressman can expect going forward.") ******sotto voce****aawwww, poor baby.

In the case of Candy Crowley, they speculated at length. http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/the-five/transcript/are-media-being-fair-paul-ryan Bleah but par for the Fox course.

As for "bias being evident" why not point a finger at conservative outlets which by nature are every bit just as biased? The Weekly Standard. Fox. The Wall Street Journal. The National Review. The Washington Times. Etc. They're far from being either "fair" or "balanced". Yeah, the omission of comment about conservative bias is significant. Apparently they get a pass though because they're not "mainstream"? Which, BTW, leads me to wonder how "mainstream" is defined. If it's liberal, it's mainstream? Just curious.......

Edited to ask again about the Bob Schieffer accusation.  Well?

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-02-2009
Tue, 08-14-2012 - 11:20pm
iluvkrat wrote:

All you need to know is that he graduated from Harvard magna cum laude and was the president of the law review.
No, that doesn't explain anything, it just adds to the mystery of how someone doing what he said he was doing even gets considered for an Ivy League school.
In order to do that, his grades had to have been pretty darn good. It sure seems that people fishing for those transcripts simply cannot believe that a black man is smart enough to accomplish what Obama did at Harvard.
That's just a sickening statement. Really? That's your conclusion? You are calling me a racist? Such impeccable logic, go right for the race card.   It merits harsher language, but it's not worth getting banned over. I could care less about his race. But, I guess when the only tool you have is a hammer, you don't have much of a choice.

 

"Resist, we much. We must, and we much. About that, be committed."

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-02-2009
Wed, 08-15-2012 - 12:00am
cshell_sonny wrote:

No, Solidad works for CNN, not Fox.  Candy Crowley also works for CNN, not Fox. Bob Shieffer works for CBS, not Fox and Andrea Mitchell works for MSNBC/NBC...again not Fox. You really missed that one......no Fox common denominator.

I saw each of these examples on their respective news outlets.

Let me just state what you probably already know. These "journalists" can make whatever republican bashing remarks they want, as long as it makes the news on Fox, they are completely immune from any criticized at all. 

It doesn't matter where you saw it or I heard it (radio), Fox reported, so it's shoot the messenger time! Quite a childish tactic, but it is a way of avoiding the issue.

 

"Resist, we much. We must, and we much. About that, be committed."

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-21-2006
Wed, 08-15-2012 - 8:27am

Are you suggesting that politicians cannot be "professionals" in other disciplines?

Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-21-2006
Wed, 08-15-2012 - 8:37am

For the "60 minutes" omission, one should read the transcript of what was aired on the show and then listen to the unedited version of the interview posted at CBS's internet site. Those paying attention, will note the omission.

For years I have picked up on the bias in the media, but was a bit unsure if it really existed or if it was my perception. It is reassuring to read articles from sources like the Pew Research Center, that not only validates its existence, but demonstrate the gravity of it. 

Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2006
Wed, 08-15-2012 - 8:57am

"Are you suggesting that politicians cannot be "professionals" in other disciplines?"

No...I'm suggesting that Mr. Ryan can't add.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-21-2006
Wed, 08-15-2012 - 9:20am

Really? You think he "can't add"?    Now, that's a deep, highly intellectual observation. I bet you're right.

Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Wed, 08-15-2012 - 9:41am

Still no links and no specifics about what was supposedly omitted from Schieffer's interview. If it was so significant, one ought to be ready, willing and able to share the information. Just a reminder. Those who make a claim bear the burden of providing proof.

Nor was there an even-handed decrying of obvious bias in conservative outlets. Omission can be as clear a sign of bias as commission (which would be the basis of the bias claim against Schieffer, right?)

But wait, wait, the light bulb just clicked on. :smileyfrustrated:  Fox covered the "omission" and "bias".  Mighty audacious and hypocritical of them! 

Jabberwocka

Pages