I looked it up. I couldn’t find anything. Your turn.
You are one of that cadre of small-minded people who imagines that there are only two political positions in the entire world. He’s not a liberal, therefore he must be a conservative. How very, very silly.
I favor:
gay marriage
women’s rights
strong environmental protections
universal health care
a universal “safety net” for all (basic life needs)
the complete removal of religion from politics
atheism
civil rights for all groups/classes (and the codification of same where belonging to certain groups may endanger those rights)
expanding legal immigration, including amnesty for all illegals who have not committed a crime while here
I also think that Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and their ilk are raving nutjobs.
Yep, I’m a good conservative, all right! :rolleyes:
Try harder. Take more than three minutes this time.
Oh no, I’ve spent far too much time already doing your work for you.
I was highly critical of the conservative movement in a post I made in a thread entitled 'Have conservatives been on the wrong side of history?" or something of that nature.
This board’s software doesn’t allow you to view only the posts made by a given individual, only the threads in which he’s posted. So this one example of how I perhaps don’t actually think the way you believe that I do will have to suffice.
Of course, you will think what you want to no matter what I say.
Well, if you’re faced with picking one of them, my preference is for the guy that lies less.
Another issue is with the degree of lying. When you do a complete 180, it’s hard to reconcile. Practice makes perfect though.
Problem with finding all that stuff about you is that it requires paying a lot more attention to you.
The way he lied about this just makes him look like an idiot who cant hold his cool. We do not need an idiot in the white house who flinches whenever a foreign representative is hunting for national security and economic strategy tells.
Gad to the zooks.
Nobody’s saying that.
We have several good conservatives on this board. I doubt anyone regards you as being one of them.
Here’s Ryan’s response:
“After having these letters called to my attention I checked into them, and they were treated as constituent service requests in the same way matters involving Social Security or Veterans Affairs are handled,” he said in a statement. “This is why I didn’t recall the letters earlier. But they should have been handled differently, and I take responsibility for that.
it is defensible. If there is a federal program out there and constituents want assistance from their representative, it does make sense for that representative to help them out.
Doing it is defensible, lying about it is not. Theres no way unless he’s incompetent that he did not know about a request for millions of dollars that he signed.
I assume you’re making a vewy cwever twist on what I said by implying that I’m "not good, " not, “not conservative.”
Bwavo on your ingenuity.
(But leaving out your snideness, do you think I’m a conservative, good or bad, just because I criticize the Demos?)
He claims he forgot about it because he thought of it as a constituent request rather than him asking for stimulus funds. There are two different approaches to getting pork. the first one is when a Congressmen is constantly trying to steer as much money as he can to his district, and the second is when he doesn’t make much effort towards that end but is approached by businesses and other organizations in his district with specific requests.
His excuse is plausible, but as always, it’s up to the judgment of the voters in the end. My own take is that while I believe Ryan is more idealistic and earnest than most politicians, even he is going to do what he has to do to stay on good terms with his local campaign contributors.
Actually, as easy as I went on Ryan there, I might have actually been too hard on him. According to Open Secrets, Ryan has procured no earmarks for campaign contributors, at least in the last session where earmarks were allowed:
So it could be he was just helping out constituents.
Actually, he request no earmarks in that period at all:
These two pieces of evidence not only make his claim a lot more plausible, they also call into question the idea that he’s a hypocrite on this issue at all.
His last earmark requests were FY08, where he made only one solo earmark request, valued at $750,000.
Everyone who has a wife has to do this. It’s not difficult, you just say “Based on XXX new information, I’ve changed my mind.” Easy peasy.
Again, this is simple to deal with, until you start going around saying “I always said this thing and not the other.” THAT is when the living hell part starts.
I hold politicians to the same standard I’d expect from something I’d scrape off my shoe. But even the shoe-scraped thing has the sense not to try to change the record over what it has or hasn’t said in the past.
Now it’s your turn, go on and ignore the very clear distinction I’ve drawn between hypocrite and liar, and wail about people being besmirched as hypocrites and liars. We’ll all wait. Again.
Well, I guess the answer I draw (after giving into the heat last night and going swimming at 9 pm and not getting back to the computer 'till recently) is The Romney/Ryan supporters DON’T CARE…they just seek to rationalize the evils of their candidates by the (often imagined/made up) ones of the opposing candidate.
And they like to bicker.
Pretty much what I figured. I didn’t miss much by floating on my back and looking at the visible stars. 
FTR, in case it matters to anyone’s argument, I’m an Independent/Unaffiliated voter (very left-leaning) for going on 20 years now.
I’m STILL voting for Obama with my whole heart (as I did last time). He’s more than earned it, imo.
Romney and Ryan are a couple of lying liars and cads (and I propose that most on the Right agreee with me).
This election is all but OVER.
Mitt Romney I agree is a huge fake. I don’t believe that about Paul Ryan and I believe I provided compelling evidence that surprised even me, and I’m a fan of Paul ryan. the guy is genuine.
As for the election being over, you sure can’t tell by the polls. Or by the amount of money Romney is raising. If Romney was a hopeless case, he would be having trouble raising money.
You don’t seem to understand the issue here, or the meaning of earmarks, for that matter.
According to Wikipedia:
Earmarks appear as amendments to bills passed by Congress. What Ryan did was write the Secretary of Energy to find favor with projects as ***part **of the “Executive Branch merit-based or competitive allocation process.” See the original Boston Globe story.
Earmarks have absolutely nothing to do with this. It was a request for stimulus funds, funds that already had been voted on and approved, although Ryan voted against them.
You are free to defend Ryan’s behavior, but you can’t do it by referring to earmarks. You have to judge the plausibility of his excuse by what actually occurred, not by an irrelevant process that didn’t.
*The article also discusses Ryan’s earmark history, if anyone wants to discuss that in a more appropriate thread. It’s larger than your claim.