Congressman Paul Ryan (R-Denial)

Pundits and columnists continue to entertain the fantastical idea that the Republican party is going to embark on a crusade of moderation and soul-searching, but so far there have been few signs from lawmakers that they actually intend to put their money where the media’s mouth is.

In his first post-election interview, former vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan said he doesn’t believe they lost on the ideas they ran on and that it’s up to President Obama to adopt their ideas.

Ryan, though, said that the election was not a referendum on his budget proposals and ideas on reforming entitlement programs.

“I don’t think we lost it on those budget issues, especially on Medicare — we clearly didn’t lose it on those issues,” he said. [...]

He said the pressure was on the president to offer detailed solutions to avoid the fiscal cliff of expiring lower tax rates and automatic spending cuts, which economists warn could spark a new recession.

“It’s in his interest to offer some ideas to put specific ideas on the table,” Ryan said, adding that he was open to a deal that included “higher revenues through tax reforms.”

Read another way — Ryan is open to a deal premised on Tax Cut Magic.

It’s convenient for Paul Ryan to say they didn’t lose based on the ideas they ran on because they were mostly his ideas. And we wouldn’t want to make this a referendum on the mythical Paul Ryan, the bold, serious, substance-bringer, would we?

If Ryan doesn’t believe they lost on the issue of Medicare, does this mean the next budget that emerges from the House of Representatives will once again include the voucherization of Medicare?

I can't hear you! La La La La (AP photo)

Ryan claiming they “clearly didn’t lose” on the issues of budgets and Medicare is probably the most counter-factual thing you will read today or perhaps the rest of the year.

Print Friendly
This entry was posted in Wingnuts and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • JLM452

    More evidence of the astounding blindness of the Right. A week after the elections factions of the Right are still scrambling to find “reasons” why they lost. They simply will not accept that the American electorate rejected their policies.

  • trgahan

    The level of denial is pretty huge. I am begining to think the GOP isn’t changing anytime soon and is banking on another midterm Tea Party-led “Save the Millionaries!” take over.

    The scary thought is beyond: “Hi, I’m Paul Ryan. Vote for me and my VP running mate, Florida Senator Tim Tebow, this November 2016.”

    • http://phydeauxpseaks.blogspot.com Bob Rutledge

      That can’t happen until at least 2020, as Tebow won’t be old enough to be elected senator until 2017.

      • vgranucci

        Not til 2024. Tebow won’t be old enough to be president (or vice president) until 2022.

        • http://phydeauxpseaks.blogspot.com Bob Rutledge

          Oh, right. :)

  • rob black

    Hmm…election analysis from a guy that lost his own home town!
    Yes, you certainly taught Obama a lesson…the lesson being that people really hate everything you stand for, the lesson a hammer takes from a nail.
    I hope if the Republicans take any thing away from this election, it will be that this guy is not an “economist”, not a “policy wonk” and frankly just not very bright across the board…but they wont. Because their new boilerplate narrative is “It’s not our ideas, its how we communicate them”. No, No, No……
    His debate “performance” where he was continually frustrated at not being able to recite his obviously memorized talking points, would be a good “what not to do” lesson for any high school forensics team.
    If he had lost his congressional seat, (a fate he richly deserved) he would now be occupying Palin’s “seat”at Fox, and slowly fading into obscurity.
    Dan Quayle with a six pack…

    • M312

      Seriously, you’d need to drink an Althouse-sized box of wine to believe that horse shit. Paul, losing Wisconsin does not make you a favorite son, ass.

  • Brutlyhonest

    The letters to the editor, and the on-line comments, of my local paper (and I suspect most others ) clearly shows the depths of delusion these people are under.

    The vitriol of the second four years will be worse than the first.

  • tommo

    Right, Paul, it’s in Obama’s interest to adopt your economic policies. Even though the country decided it was not in the country’s best interest to do so.

    You’ll be singing another tune when Obama takes you fools off “The Economic Curb” in January.

  • muselet

    “I don’t think we lost it on those budget issues, especially on Medicare — we clearly didn’t lose it on those issues,” he said.

    And if Mitt Romney had won the presidency, Paul Ryan would be loudly crowing that the election was a clear endorsement of his positions on budget issues. Heads, he wins; tails, Barack Obama loses.

    Convenient, that.

    –alopecia

  • D_C_Wilson

    Across the board, the republicans in Congress are now taking the stance of, “Obama won, so that means we have to adopt Romney’s tax plan”. Once again, heads they win, tails we lose. If republicans win, it’s a mandate for republican ideas. If democrats win, it’s a mandate for republican ideas.

    This is why the republicans are able to win even when they lose: Our “liberal media” constantly lets them dictate the narrative.

  • Victor_the_Crab

    So Eddie Munster, if it wasn’t your Ayn Rand inspired budget proposals that lost the election for you guys, then what was it exactly? Please tell us. I’m sure it’s a really… REALLY good one!

    • mrbrink

      The Urban people!

      Otherwise known as the places in America where most people live.

  • bphoon

    “I don’t think we lost it on those budget issues, especially on Medicare — we clearly didn’t lose it on those issues,” he said.

    And this guy’s supposed to be one of the smartest Congressmen the GOP has to offer? Makes me feel pretty good about Democrats’ prospects going forward.

    One of the best lines I’ve heard on this was from Lawrence O’Donnell tonight: “Time in the gym is the only thing separating Paul Ryan from Rush Limbaugh.”