I am responding to the review of pomposity's new book. Did he cover the part where he threw his state department under the bus so trump could strong arm Zelensky.....
Paul Ryan says he won't back Trump because Trump will be a losing candidate for the GOP. That is NOT a sufficient reason to oppose Trump. If Ryan and other GOP elites cannot articulate a moral argument against Trump, then he and they do not have a moral political vision for the country. Their politics is reduced to power calculations. Their appeals to morality thus expose them as moral cowards since morality becomes merely instrumental -- important when it yields success for them and unimportant when it might harm their electoral prospects.
Does Privatizing Paul still think that this concept works for American's SSI/Medicare upon retiring? The new GOP lead House of Clowns would love to cut it altogether. Either way all monies paid in by employees and employers should be immediately reimbursed, if requested, at today's value, as privatizing it would look like today's failed prison system.
Yes: ask him if he has finally given up on Ayn Rand. Ask him why he has not spoken out more forcefully about the trend to fascism of the Republican Party. Ask him who he will support in 2024. Ask the hard questions, Charlie. This man may be your friend, but he isn’t mine.
Why? Does he really believe that the danger from electing Democrats is such a risk to America that any action done to stop that from occurring is justified? If so why? Are transgender bathrooms a greater danger than white nationalism, coups and utter disregard for the rule of law? Or is it really as inconsequential as making sure your team wins? Did they throw our country under a bus to hold some measly house seat for some rep that no one will ever remember?
Second, what is the end game here? How do they think this plays out? Non-Republicans are not going to all die off, unless they intend to kill us all. Do they think a minority can impose its will on the majority? How in God's name do they think this is going to end?
Wisconsin and Michigan are geographically (and ideologically) quite similar. Michigan used a citizens' redistricting committee to eliminate partisan gerrymandering in their state and doing so changed the ideological character of its federal representation this cycle fairly dramatically. Does he feel a similar commission in the Badger state would have similar results?
For so long, I have been desperate for someone to confront Paul Ryan (as well as other supposedly responsibility members of the political and business elite) as to why he continues to serve on the board of directors of Fox Corporation, which on its air, permits Tucker Carlson to spread demonstrably false misinformation that supports Russia, disparages the United States, and undermines our support for our democratic partner Ukraine. As you know, Charlie, clips from Tucker Carlson's show are a mainstay of daily broadcasts on Russian-controlled state media; he and his show are used, nearly every day, as anti-western, anti-American propaganda. It's little different than if Fox were producing anti-U.S. propaganda directly for the Russian state.
Should Mr. Ryan continue to serve on the board of a company that produces vile, anti-American propaganda? What are his responsibilities, as a patriotic American citizen and as a director of a corporation formed and operated under U.S. law, to exercise his influence as a director to ensure that Fox Corporation does not serve interests directly antithetical to those of the United States? What, if anything, has he done to confront Fox Corporation's support for this anti-American broadcast?
From Rose Mason's comment on Timothy Snyder's substack article on NY FBI office and Russia:
"There’s two people I think Putin pays: Rohrabacher and Trump,' McCarthy (R-Calif.) said. [. . .] Some of the lawmakers laughed at McCarthy’s comment. Then McCarthy quickly added: 'Swear to God.' [...] [Paul] Ryan instructed his Republican lieutenants to keep the conversation private, saying: 'No leaks. . . . This is how we know we’re a real family here.'"--Recording of June 15, 2016
Please ask Paul why he has been so reticent to comment on on misinformation and flat out lies by Tucker Carlson, et al. Is he comfortable with The Fox evening crew seemingly developing policy for the crazies in Congress, who really have all the leverage?
Ask him why the Republican Party jettisoned truth, character, integrity and ethics to become “the ends justify the means” and “by any means necessary” party?
Does he agree with the adage “ silence is assent” if “yes” then he is assenting to the election denial, anti-Semitism and authoritarian/fascist metamorphosis of the Republican Party?
If you still believe in Ayn Rand objectivism where man’s own happiness is his moral purpose and productive achievement his noblest activity how do you support Jim Jordan, Marjory Taylor Green, Paul Gosar, and their ilk who are more interested in investigating than legislating? Or does “the ends justify the means” and “by any means necessary” allow the achievement of happiness and therefore the bomb throwing, election denying, gaslighting, anti-Semitism, denigration of institutions and norms, out right lying ARE the noblest activities?
So there is nothing ethically or morally wrong with seating George Santos and giving him committee assignments?
Charlie, I recently heard Paul Ryan on an AEI podcast. He talked about actual conservative policy ideas that sounded reasonable (not antipopular or crazy). But he also spoke as if only Republicans could/would implement them and that Democrats were the crazy ones. Tell Paul Ryan that 1986 would like it political landscape back -- then ask him honestly, why he doesn't take his ideas to centrist Democrats. Ask him why he doesn't understand and appreciate that conservative public policy now comes from the moderate and Red dog side of the Democratic party. If he pushed there (along with Right of center Republicans), he may actually have some success. He needs to stop being a yesteryear partisan first and really appreciate the world as it actually is in 2023.
Let me get this straight. You won’t sit down with Kari Lake. But you WILL sit down with a board member of the influential network that enables and empowers her. And Miller has “time” for him. Regretting becoming a member of The Bulwark already.
Please Charlie, press Ryan respectfully but tenaciously. Too bad if he feels put out by his one time conservative ally. It’s a topic rich environment with a guy that either wants to score points with the GOP base or show enough contrition to start regaining credibility. In other words, it’s more about Charlie’s goals and attitude as he enters the ring. The list of questions should be apparent. Anticipating followup questions to Ryan’s expected party line replies should be a goldmine.
I don't feel the venom of most of your other commentors, I'm just disappointed. I mean, I voted for him to be Vice President. He spoke up when Trump wanted to ban Muslims. He was an imperfect Speaker, but he had a latent authoritarian in the White House and a caucus with no interest whatsoever in governing. It's the Fox board thing, tolerating the borderline treason of the talking heads that is most disappointing. And please, no claims of "It would be worse if I left."
Well, what I want to have you ask him if he's okay with being at best a naive idiot or at worst a hypocritical piece of shit, but that's probably not productive. So instead I would have you ask him how he can consider himself pro life when he directs a media corporation that promotes so many attitudes and policies that make it as difficult as possible to make raising a family economically untenable.
I am responding to the review of pomposity's new book. Did he cover the part where he threw his state department under the bus so trump could strong arm Zelensky.....
Paul Ryan says he won't back Trump because Trump will be a losing candidate for the GOP. That is NOT a sufficient reason to oppose Trump. If Ryan and other GOP elites cannot articulate a moral argument against Trump, then he and they do not have a moral political vision for the country. Their politics is reduced to power calculations. Their appeals to morality thus expose them as moral cowards since morality becomes merely instrumental -- important when it yields success for them and unimportant when it might harm their electoral prospects.
Why did he think it was Ok to have shirtless photos of himself , like Putin ?
Does Privatizing Paul still think that this concept works for American's SSI/Medicare upon retiring? The new GOP lead House of Clowns would love to cut it altogether. Either way all monies paid in by employees and employers should be immediately reimbursed, if requested, at today's value, as privatizing it would look like today's failed prison system.
Yes: ask him if he has finally given up on Ayn Rand. Ask him why he has not spoken out more forcefully about the trend to fascism of the Republican Party. Ask him who he will support in 2024. Ask the hard questions, Charlie. This man may be your friend, but he isn’t mine.
Why? Does he really believe that the danger from electing Democrats is such a risk to America that any action done to stop that from occurring is justified? If so why? Are transgender bathrooms a greater danger than white nationalism, coups and utter disregard for the rule of law? Or is it really as inconsequential as making sure your team wins? Did they throw our country under a bus to hold some measly house seat for some rep that no one will ever remember?
Second, what is the end game here? How do they think this plays out? Non-Republicans are not going to all die off, unless they intend to kill us all. Do they think a minority can impose its will on the majority? How in God's name do they think this is going to end?
Wisconsin and Michigan are geographically (and ideologically) quite similar. Michigan used a citizens' redistricting committee to eliminate partisan gerrymandering in their state and doing so changed the ideological character of its federal representation this cycle fairly dramatically. Does he feel a similar commission in the Badger state would have similar results?
For so long, I have been desperate for someone to confront Paul Ryan (as well as other supposedly responsibility members of the political and business elite) as to why he continues to serve on the board of directors of Fox Corporation, which on its air, permits Tucker Carlson to spread demonstrably false misinformation that supports Russia, disparages the United States, and undermines our support for our democratic partner Ukraine. As you know, Charlie, clips from Tucker Carlson's show are a mainstay of daily broadcasts on Russian-controlled state media; he and his show are used, nearly every day, as anti-western, anti-American propaganda. It's little different than if Fox were producing anti-U.S. propaganda directly for the Russian state.
Should Mr. Ryan continue to serve on the board of a company that produces vile, anti-American propaganda? What are his responsibilities, as a patriotic American citizen and as a director of a corporation formed and operated under U.S. law, to exercise his influence as a director to ensure that Fox Corporation does not serve interests directly antithetical to those of the United States? What, if anything, has he done to confront Fox Corporation's support for this anti-American broadcast?
Ask Paul Ryan about this:
From Rose Mason's comment on Timothy Snyder's substack article on NY FBI office and Russia:
"There’s two people I think Putin pays: Rohrabacher and Trump,' McCarthy (R-Calif.) said. [. . .] Some of the lawmakers laughed at McCarthy’s comment. Then McCarthy quickly added: 'Swear to God.' [...] [Paul] Ryan instructed his Republican lieutenants to keep the conversation private, saying: 'No leaks. . . . This is how we know we’re a real family here.'"--Recording of June 15, 2016
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/house-majority-leader-to-colleagues-in-2016-i-think-putin-pays-trump/2017/05/17/515f6f8a-3aff-11e7-8854-21f359183e8c_story.html
Please ask Paul why he has been so reticent to comment on on misinformation and flat out lies by Tucker Carlson, et al. Is he comfortable with The Fox evening crew seemingly developing policy for the crazies in Congress, who really have all the leverage?
Ask him why the Republican Party jettisoned truth, character, integrity and ethics to become “the ends justify the means” and “by any means necessary” party?
Does he agree with the adage “ silence is assent” if “yes” then he is assenting to the election denial, anti-Semitism and authoritarian/fascist metamorphosis of the Republican Party?
If you still believe in Ayn Rand objectivism where man’s own happiness is his moral purpose and productive achievement his noblest activity how do you support Jim Jordan, Marjory Taylor Green, Paul Gosar, and their ilk who are more interested in investigating than legislating? Or does “the ends justify the means” and “by any means necessary” allow the achievement of happiness and therefore the bomb throwing, election denying, gaslighting, anti-Semitism, denigration of institutions and norms, out right lying ARE the noblest activities?
So there is nothing ethically or morally wrong with seating George Santos and giving him committee assignments?
Charlie, I recently heard Paul Ryan on an AEI podcast. He talked about actual conservative policy ideas that sounded reasonable (not antipopular or crazy). But he also spoke as if only Republicans could/would implement them and that Democrats were the crazy ones. Tell Paul Ryan that 1986 would like it political landscape back -- then ask him honestly, why he doesn't take his ideas to centrist Democrats. Ask him why he doesn't understand and appreciate that conservative public policy now comes from the moderate and Red dog side of the Democratic party. If he pushed there (along with Right of center Republicans), he may actually have some success. He needs to stop being a yesteryear partisan first and really appreciate the world as it actually is in 2023.
Let me get this straight. You won’t sit down with Kari Lake. But you WILL sit down with a board member of the influential network that enables and empowers her. And Miller has “time” for him. Regretting becoming a member of The Bulwark already.
Do us a favour. Do NOT puff piece this interview!
Please Charlie, press Ryan respectfully but tenaciously. Too bad if he feels put out by his one time conservative ally. It’s a topic rich environment with a guy that either wants to score points with the GOP base or show enough contrition to start regaining credibility. In other words, it’s more about Charlie’s goals and attitude as he enters the ring. The list of questions should be apparent. Anticipating followup questions to Ryan’s expected party line replies should be a goldmine.
I don't feel the venom of most of your other commentors, I'm just disappointed. I mean, I voted for him to be Vice President. He spoke up when Trump wanted to ban Muslims. He was an imperfect Speaker, but he had a latent authoritarian in the White House and a caucus with no interest whatsoever in governing. It's the Fox board thing, tolerating the borderline treason of the talking heads that is most disappointing. And please, no claims of "It would be worse if I left."
Well, what I want to have you ask him if he's okay with being at best a naive idiot or at worst a hypocritical piece of shit, but that's probably not productive. So instead I would have you ask him how he can consider himself pro life when he directs a media corporation that promotes so many attitudes and policies that make it as difficult as possible to make raising a family economically untenable.