NORTON META TAG

Showing posts with label ryan budget plan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ryan budget plan. Show all posts

03 August 2013

Wonkbook: This is what it looks like when the Republican budget strategy falls apart 1AUG13

THE repiglican / tea-bagger obstructionist remind me of Egypt's muslim brotherhood. Full of deceptive rhetoric, once in office they are unable to govern, leaving their constituents no better off, and generally worse off than they were before. The only ones to profit from their election are the rich and powerful. This from the Washington Post is on the total failure of the repiglicans and tea-baggers to move their fanatical regressive agenda through Congress. The question is how long those who were duped into electing them are going to tolerate their unproductive antics in Congress? 
Question of the day: Who said this?
“Thus I believe that the House has made its choice: sequestration -- and its unrealistic and ill-conceived discretionary cuts -- must be brought to an end."
Nancy Pelosi? Steny Hoyer? Chris Van Hollen?
Wrong. That was Hal Rogers, the Kentucky Republican who leads the House Appropriations Committee, after the aptly named THUD bill failed on the House floor (notice how I didn’t say it “landed with a thud”, or something similar? You can thank me later.)
“THUD,” in this case, stood for Transportation, Housing and Urban Development. It’s the bill to fund those parts of the government through the next year. The cuts needed to be deep to hit the Ryan budget’s target. Too deep, as it turned out. The bill was pulled off the floor as support collapsed around it.
This is what it looks like when the Republican budget strategy collapses.
THUD’s fall comes days after House Republicans were supposed to release the Labor, Health and Human Services bill, which required cuts 19 percent beneath sequestration’s levels. The bill didn’t materialize.
It comes after House Republicans passed defense and veteran’s appropriations at higher levels than sequestration permitted — necessitating deeper cuts elsewhere.
Meanwhile, in the Senate, Republicans are breaking with Mitch McConnell to back appropriations bills that reach pre-sequestration levels — bills that House Republicans have already dismissed.
Budget politics have an odd rhythm. The budget proposal comes early in the year, and its cuts are vague. It mostly just sets broad targets for different categories of spending. The appropriations bills come later in the year, and that’s where cuts need to get specific.
Republicans endorsed the vague outlines of Ryan’s budget early in the year. But now they’re realizing they can’t pass the documents that make those cuts specific — they’re simply too deep. But they can’t back out of the Ryan budget, either. The result is a mess — although one that may make at least a few Republicans, including Hal Rogers, more eager for a face-saving budget deal in the fall.

26 October 2012

Romney-Ryan's Real Poverty Plan: Soak the Poor & Soaking the Poor, State by State 26OKT&3FEB12

WELL here's a big surprise, the people who will suffer the most during a romney administration are the poor, YOU KNOW, the American poor, those living in poverty, the ones romney-ryan describe as part of that 47% of the population they see as takers. You might also want to check out some of my earlier post Nuns on the Bus Strike Again! 8OKT12 http://bucknacktssordidtawdryblog.blogspot.com/2012/10/nuns-on-bus-strike-again-10okt12.html
,WATCH THE VIDEO "THE LINE" IT EXPOSES POVERTY IN AMERICA, AND IT IS NOT WHAT YOU THINK 2OKT12 http://bucknacktssordidtawdryblog.blogspot.com/2012/10/watch-video-line-it-exposes-poverty-in.html
,Catholic Leaders to Rep. Paul Ryan: Stop Distorting Church Teaching to Justify Immoral Budget & Catholic theologians denounce Paul Ryan's budget 13APR12 http://bucknacktssordidtawdryblog.blogspot.com/2012/04/catholic-leaders-to-rep-paul-ryan-stop.html
, and there are plenty more on this serious issue, search this blog for poverty, social justice and Catholic. From Mother Jones....
So what would Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan do for the poor and the working class if they were elected? Let's recap:
  • They would allow the payroll tax holiday to expire. This would immediately raise taxes on everyone, and would hit the working poor especially hard.
  • They would repeal Obamacare, which would immediately kick about 17 million low-income earners and their family members off of Medicaid.
  • In addition, they want to block grant Medicaid and cap its growth. In some states, this wouldn't have a big immediate impact. In other states, conservative governors and legislatures would use their newfound authority to limit enrollments and cut benefits substantially. Over time, all states would have to cut enrollments dramatically, probably by another 15-20 million within a decade.
  • If they pursue the cuts outlined in Paul Ryan's budget plan, they would cut funding for SNAP (food stamps) by more than $100 billion over the next decade. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that this would reduce enrollment in the program by at least 8 million people.
  • They would cut funding for Planned Parenthood and other reproductive health organizations. This would especially hurt poor women, since they don't have the resources to pay for services at full-cost clinics.
  • They would cut the college tax credit, the child tax credit, and the earned-income tax credit. All of these are programs designed to help the working poor.
This is a short post. Sometimes it's better to lay out the facts simply and starkly, because Romney's priorities really are pretty stark: He wants to cut taxes on the rich and cut spending on the poor. That's Romney's real poverty plan.
Front page image: Chris Wilson/Milwaukee Journal Sentinel/Zuma

16 October 2012

Why Biden Won 12OCT12

JOE BIDEN blew lyin' paul ryan out of the arena in the debate last night!!!! To all those whinny little bitch pundits I saw on Charlie Rose after the debate who could only complain about Joe's style more than about lyin ryan's lack of honesty and information need to get lives. Gwen Iffil swam against the tide as the lone person wanting to discuss policy and agendas of the candidates. Check this out from Robert Reich on HuffPost....
I thought Biden won last night's debate because he came off as genuine, passionate and brimming with conviction. Ryan, by contrast, seemed like a wooden marionette, a kid out of his depth relative to someone who not only knew the facts but lived them.
On taxes, Ryan couldn't come up with any details about what loopholes he and Romney would close, or how their magic arithmetic (giant tax cut for the wealthy plus $2 trillion more for the military than the joint chiefs of staff want) can possibly be paid for without socking it to the middle class.
By contrast, Biden made the case for average working people whose wages have barely risen in 30 years but who are bearing a higher total tax burden (payroll, sales, property, income) on a higher percent of their income than high rollers like Romney -- and why the well-off should do more.
On Medicare, Ryan couldn't explain why his plan wasn't a voucher program that "saved" money only by shifting the costs on to seniors who would end up holding the bag as medical costs rose. Biden effectively defended the president's plan to save Medicare by cutting excessive payments to providers.
Biden also pointed out that Ryan and his allies had tried to privatize Social Security. Score another one for Joe.
On abortion, Ryan had to admit he and Romney would work to prevent women from having the right to choose an abortion if they needed and wanted one. Biden made it clear his religious beliefs about when life began should not, in his view, force anyone who didn't share them to follow them.
I thought Biden's closing could have been tougher, drawing a sharper contrast between the Romney-Ryan "you're on your own" worldview, and the "we're in it all together" belief that has built America -- and which Obama and Biden represent.
But overall it was Biden's night. He not only trounced Ryan, but also, in the process, trounced Romney. Joe Biden is an average Joe solidly grounded in America's working middle class -- nothing pretentious or devious about him -- in contrast to the plutocrat who heads the Republican ticket, and the billionaires who are backing him.
ROBERT B. REICH, Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley, was Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration. Time Magazine named him one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the last century. He has written thirteen books, including the best sellers "Aftershock" and "The Work of Nations." His latest is an e-book, "Beyond Outrage," now available in paperback. He is also a founding editor of the American Prospect magazine and chairman of Common Cause.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/why-biden-won_b_1962939.html?utm_source=Alert-blogger&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Email%2BNotifications 

11 October 2012

Repeat After Me: Obama Cut the Deficit and Slowed Spending to Lowest Level in 50 Years 10OKT12

mitt robme romney, lyin' paul ryan and their host of repiglican and tea-bagger acolytes keep repeating lies about the Obama administration, government spending and the deficit. It is a constant drum beat in their presidential propaganda campaign, but the facts are the opposite of what they are telling the American people. From HuffPost.....
Illustrative of his contempt for the truth, Mitt Romney's campaign website continues to host the following statement: "Since President Obama assumed office three years ago, federal spending has accelerated at a pace without precedent in recent history."
On Friday, we discovered yet another reason why this is a super-colossal lie.
With the end of fiscal year 2012, the Congressional Budget Office announced the 2012 federal budget deficit: $1.1 trillion. Taken purely at face value, this number is enormous. Yet every Democrat, and especially the Obama campaign, ought to be telling anyone who will listen: Not only has the president cut the deficit by $312 billion during his first term (so far), but he's cut the deficit by $200 billion in the past year alone. And the CBO projected that the 2013 Obama budget, if enacted as is, would shrink the deficit to $977 billion -- a four year total of nearly $500 billion in deficit reduction.
Okay, yeah, I get it. It's risky to mention the deficit, but not when you couch it in math and the facts.
As I've documented before, the CBO reported in January, 2009 that the federal budget deficit for that fiscal year, which began on October 1, 2008, was already $1.2 trillion. President Obama's additional '09 spending added another $200 billion to the deficit, bringing the total to $1.412 trillion. Unprecedented and huge, but given the enormity of the financial crisis and the depth of the recession, there weren't many other options on the table. Add two wars into the mix and there you go.
But since then, deficit spending has dropped precipitously. Why? Chiefly because President Obama signed the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act in February, 2010, which mandates that new spending be offset with spending cuts or new revenue. Yes, a Democratic president and a Democratic Congress passed this legislation. Guess how many congressional Republicans voted for the law. Zero. Not one. Perhaps during this week's debate, Vice President Biden could ask Rep. Paul Ryan who voted against the bill.
Consequently, the president is responsible for the lowest government spending growth in 60 years, according to the Wall Street Journal's Market Watch.
2012-10-10-chart_spending_growth.jpg
Once again, Mitt Romney's website still contains the words: "Since President Obama assumed office three years ago, federal spending has accelerated at a pace without precedent in recent history." Pants on fire times a thousand.
Fact: the president's record is exactly the opposite of what Romney says. And how long ago was this statistic released by the Wall Street Journal and subsequently affirmed by fact checkers? Five months ago. On September 26, when asked about his record of mendacious claims, Mitt Romney told CNN's Jim Acosta, "We've been absolutely spot on. And any time there's been anything that's been amiss, we correct it or remove it." Oh yeah? Well, Mr. Romney, you missed a whopper.
Another whopper: during Romney's "winning" debate against the president last week, he claimed, "The president said he'd cut the deficit in half. Unfortunately, he doubled it." Another lie. Yes, the president said he'd cut the deficit in half -- but he absolutely did not double it. As I've outlined here, he's cut the deficit by 22 percent so far -- 35 percent by the end of 2013.
Furthermore, I can name two Democratic presidents who've cut the deficit through the duration of their presidencies: Clinton and Obama. And what about Republican presidents? Bush 43? He turned a $200 billion surplus into a $400 billion deficit by the end of his first term, and a $1.2 trillion deficit by the end of his second term. Bush 41? No. Reagan? No. Ford? No. Nixon? No. The last Republican president who cut the deficit was Eisenhower. By the way, I'm sick of hearing the farcical line about Congress "controlling the purse strings." Any six-year-old child who's watched a Schoolhouse Rock cartoon knows the president signs all legislation before it becomes law, including appropriations bills. The House can't magically spend money without a presidential signature. Besides, if the president is to be blamed for the size of the deficit -- and the Republicans have been merciless on the president in this area in spite of reality, and their own party's record -- it's only fair that he should get credit when the deficit is reduced.
Yet without objections, the Romney campaign and the Republicans continue to champion their status as "fiscal hawks" even though the facts prove that to correlate "fiscal responsibility" and "Republican Party" is absurd on its face. Even though Romney's plan for the deficit and the economy is as shifty, murky and ambiguous as he is, there appears to be nothing -- absolutely nothing -- about the Romney plan that's any different from every Republican presidential plan in recent history, but we're supposed to believe that Romney will cut the deficit anyway. In fact, as we all know by now, Romney is proposing $5 trillion in un-funded tax cuts, as well as massive increases in military spending, and, if Romney wins, you can bet the Republicans will jettison their deficit and debt hawkery into the next nearest memory hole to be forgotten until another Democrat enters the White House.
If the Obama campaign and the Democrats can talk about the deficit in these terms, it undercuts one of the leading Republican attacks and becomes a winning issue for the president. Plus it helps to cement the reality of Mitt Romney The Pathological Liar.
Cross-posted at The Daily Banter.
Subscribe to the uncensored and totally raw Bob & Chez Show After Party podcast.
Click here to listen to the Bubble Genius Bob & Chez Show podcast.
BobCesca.com Blog with special thanks to Rockville attorney Kush Arora.

 

Follow Bob Cesca on Twitter: www.twitter.com/bobcesca_go  
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/repeat-after-me-obama-cut_b_1955561.html?utm_source=Alert-blogger&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Email%2BNotifications 

Memo to Joe, Re: Debate 10OKT12

THIS is what we expect from VP Joe Biden, good advise from Robert Reich. Godspeed Joe!

TO: VPOTUS
FROM: Robert Reich
RE: Debate
Beware: Paul Ryan will appear affable. He's less polished and aggressive than Romney, even soft-spoken. And he acts as if he's saying reasonable things.
But under the surface he's a right-wing zealot. And nothing he says or believes is reasonable -- neither logical nor reflecting the values of the great majority of Americans.
Your job is to smoke Ryan out, exposing his fanaticism. The best way to do this is to force him to take responsibility for the regressive budget he created as chairman of the House Budget Committee.
Ryan won't be able to pull a Romney -- pretending he's a moderate -- because the Ryan budget is out there, with specific numbers.
It's an astounding document that Romney fully supports. And it fills in the details Romney has left out of his proposals. Mitt Romney is a robot who will say and do whatever he's programmed to do. Ryan is the robot's brain. The robot has no heart. It's your job to enable America to see this.
I suggest you hold up a copy of the Ryan budget in front of the cameras. You might even read selected passages.
Emphasize these points: Ryan's budget turns Medicare into vouchers. It includes the same $716 billion of savings Romney last week accused the President of cutting out of Medicare -- but instead of getting it from providers he gets it from the elderly.
It turns Medicaid over to cash-starved states, with even less federal contribution. This will hurt the poor as well as middle-class elderly in nursing homes.
Over 60 percent of its savings come out of programs for lower-income Americans -- like Pell grants and food stamps.
Yet it gives huge tax cuts to the top 1 percent -- some $4.7 trillion over the next decade. (This is the same top 1 percent, you might add, who have reaped 93 percent of the gains from the recovery, whose stock portfolios have regained everything they lost and more, and who are now taking home a larger share of total income than at any time in the last eighty years and paying the lowest taxes than at any time since before World War II.)
As a result it doesn't reduce the federal debt at all. In fact, it worsens it.
On top of all this, Ryan is on record -- as is Romney -- for wanting to repeal both ObamaCare (taking coverage away from 30 million Americans) and the Dodd-Frank law (thereby giving cover to Wall Street).
Your challenge will be get this across firmly and clearly, with an appropriate degree of indignation -- on a medium that rewards style over substance, glibness over detail, and optimistic happy talk over grim reality.
My suggestion: Be cheerfully aggressive. Take Ryan on directly and sharply but do so with a smile. Force him to take responsibility for the regressiveness of his budget and the radicalism of his ideology.
Prepare your closing carefully (unlike the President seemed to have done last week), and tell America the unvarnished truth: Romney and Ryan plan to do a reverse Robin Hood at a time in our nation's history when the rich have never had it so good while the rest haven't been as economically insecure since the Great Depression.
Their agenda is all the more remarkable in that we have a growing budget deficit to deal with, along soaring healthcare costs and aging boomers without enough to retire on because their net worth went down the drain with their homes.
The fundamental question is whether we're still all in it together -- whether as American citizens we continue to have obligations to one another to assure equal opportunity and help for those who need it -- or we're on our own, without a common bond or a common good. Romney and Ryan represent the latter view, a view utterly at odds with what we have accomplished as a nation.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/biden-ryan-vp-debate_b_1955964.html?utm_source=Alert-blogger&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Email%2BNotifications

08 October 2012

Nuns on the Bus Strike Again! 8OKT12

THE truth on the lyin' ryan budget plan from the Nuns On The Bus!
Dispatched by the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, the Nuns on the Bus, who we’ve covered before, recently crunched the numbers on Paul Ryan’s budget, and calculated that, in order to compensate for the cut in food stamps the VP candidate has proposed:
every church in the country would have to come up with approximately $50,000 dedicated to feeding people — every year for the next 10 years.
Yikes. And remember their DNC spot? At least there’s one group willing to contest the Right’s so-called “moral perspective” on the economy.
http://dailyagenda.org/2012/10/08/nuns-on-the-bus-strike-again/

14 September 2012

Mitt Romney Tax Policy Studies: Candidate Seemingly Contradicts Their Conclusions 14SEP12

mitt robme romney and lyin' paul ryan can't offer any substantial studies supporting their budget / tax plan because there isn't one. They are lying to the electorate because they know once voters know just what the 99% will loose to pay for the lifestyles of the 1% they will loose the election. They are deliberately lying, deceiving and misleading the American people, not for the benefit of the nation (and I don't think anyone using those tactics does so for the benefit of the nation), but for the benefit of their rich (sheldon adelson) and corporate masters (koch brothers) who have bought and paid for their campaign. From HuffPost.....

Mitt Romney Tax Plan
WASHINGTON -- Over the past few weeks, the Romney campaign has repeatedly pointed to five separate studies supporting the candidate's contention that a dramatic, across-the-board, reduction in tax rates can be paid for by economic growth and the elimination of deductions and exemptions for high-income earners.

Romney himself referenced these five studies in an interview with Meet the Press on Sunday. His running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), said the same during his run through the Sunday show circuit.

A closer examination, however, calls into question the fact that there are even five studies at all. Last week, the Romney campaign passed along the five documents that the candidate had referenced on NBC's Meet the Press. Three of the five are blog posts or op-eds (as opposed to academic literature), and two of those three are written by the same author: Harvard economist Martin Feldstein.

Of the remaining two studies, one is the tax reform white paper authored by Romney-backing economists and paid for by Romney for President, Inc. (in an email to PolitiFact, the Romney campaign highlighted several Wall Street Journal editorials in place of the campaign white paper as the "fifth" study).
The final study, produced by Princeton University's Harvey Rosen, backs the Romney campaign's assertions by arguing that people will work more, accumulate more income, pay more taxes, and seek out fewer loopholes if their tax rates are lowered. But even that report has several nuances that complicate the candidate's use of it.

Romney is not without philosophical support with respect to his tax plan. The Wall Street Journal editorials that his campaign sent PolitiFact, for one, argue that sharp reductions in tax rates will spur economic growth, which, in turn, will allow for increases in tax revenues. Those pieces have helped the campaign push back on a critical study by the Tax Policy Center, which concluded that Romney would have to eliminate tax deductions on things like home mortgage interest payments, charitable donations, and employer-provided health insurance in order to have his plan be deficit-neutral.

But even Feldstein has said that to make Romney's math work, some of those deductions would have to be eliminated on incomes over $100,000. In his August 28 Wall Street Journal piece, what Romney calls a "study," Feldstein writes that Romney could generate $191 billion by scrubbing these deductions, "more than enough to offset the revenue losses from the individual tax cuts proposed by Gov. Romney."

In other words, the economist who has written two of the five studies that the Romney campaign highlights has conceded that Romney would have to eliminate tax preferences for people making over $100,000 per year in order to make his plan work. And yet, when asked in an interview with "Good Morning America" on Friday morning if he would remove those deductions and exemptions for incomes over $100,000, Romney said "no."

"That’s not what I propose," he said. "And, of course, part of my plan is to stimulate economic growth. The biggest source of getting the country to a balanced budget is not by raising taxes or by cutting spending."

The statement follows months of refusals from the Romney campaign to actually detail what kind of deductions and exemptions the candidate would seek to eliminate once in office. George Stephanopoulos, hosting GMA, pushed back, noting that Romney was now actually distancing himself from a study he routinely cites as supportive.
Romney responded by saying he hadn't "seen [Feldstein's] precise study" but that there were five studies in total "that point out that we can get to a balanced budget without raising taxes on middle income people." Romney would define middle income as $200,000 to $250,000 per year and lower.
With that measure of middle class, Princeton economist Rosen's study may still suffice. Rosen argued that Romney could get his tax plan to deficit neutrality by eliminating deductions for income over $200,000 a year. But in a separate interview with Reuters on Friday, he seemingly revised that figure downward to $100,000 per year
"What the political system would find feasible, I don’t know,” Rosen said. “It’s mathematically possible."
Even then, there are questions that surround the study's conclusions. Rosen depends on assumptions that he acknowledges are not made by the Treasury Department or the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation about how high-income earners respond to changes in tax rates. Unlike those government bodies, he assumes that the wealthy will not seek to take advantage of as many tax loopholes if their overall tax rate is lower. More importantly, he assumes that Romney's tax plan will grow wage and capital income by at least three percent. This could be viewed as an aggressive assumption. Under President Bush, the entire economy (not just tax policy) resulted in total personal income growth that varied between 2.8 percent and 6.7 percent.
Romney may agree with Rosen's data when it comes to wage growth. But he is now on record opposing the idea that certain exemptions and deductions would need to be eliminated above a $100,000-a-year threshold in order to make the plan work.
The situation seems to leave the Romney campaign with supportive economists, but no purely supportive academic study.
In addition to Rosen's work and Feldstein's two articles, the Romney campaign has highlighted a post by Matt Jensen of the American Enterprise Institute. But that post is primarily a rebuke of a small sliver of the Tax Policy Center analysis -- Jensen argues that, contrary the TPC, Romney could get tens of billions in revenue by eliminating the exclusion of interest on tax-exempt bonds and interest on life insurance savings. The Romney campaign's own white paper, authored by Romney-backing economists, doesn't attempt to lay out how mathematically his plan will work. Instead, it says that the former governor will "broaden the base to ensure that tax reform is revenue neutral."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/14/romney-tax-policy_n_1884527.html?utm_source=Alert-blogger&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Email%2BNotifications 

07 September 2012

Sister Simone Campbell at the 2012 Democratic National Convention 5SEP12

SISTER SIMONE CAMPBELL gave a strong, inspiring call for the nation to join the Nuns On The Bus in their fight for social justice for all Americans, rejecting the romney-ryan budget proposal. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASmM2YHxsfs&feature=plcp 

Transcript of Simone Campbell remarks as prepared for delivery, Democratic National Convention


2012 Democratic National Convention Logo.  (PRNewsFoto/2012 Democratic National Convention Committee)
2012 Democratic National Convention: Remarks as Prepared for Delivery by Sister Simone Campbell, Executive Director, Roman Catholic Social Justice Organization, NETWORK The following is a transcript of a speech, as prepared for delivery, by Sister Simone Campbell, Executive Director, Roman Catholic Social Justice Organization, NETWORK, at the Democratic National Convention on Wednesday, September 5, 2012.
Good evening, I'm Sister Simone Campbell, and I'm one of the "nuns on the bus." So, yes, we have nuns on the bus. And a nun on the podium!
Let me explain why I'm here. In June, I joined other Catholic sisters on a 2,700-mile bus journey through nine states to tell Americans about the budget Congressman Paul Ryan wrote and Governor Romney endorsed.
Paul Ryan claims his budget reflects the principles of our shared Catholic faith. But the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops stated that the Ryan budget failed a basic moral test, because it would harm families living in poverty.
We agree with our bishops, and that's why we went on the road: to stand with struggling families and to lift up our Catholic sisters who serve them. Their work to alleviate suffering would be seriously harmed by the Romney-Ryan budget, and that is wrong.
During our journey, I rediscovered a few truths. First, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are correct when they say that each individual should be responsible. But their budget goes astray in not acknowledging that we are responsible not only for ourselves and our immediate families. Rather, our faith strongly affirms that we are all responsible for one another.
I am my sister's keeper. I am my brother's keeper. While we were in Toledo, I met 10-year-old twins Matt and Mark, who had gotten into trouble at school for fighting. Sister Virginia and the staff at the Padua Center took them in when they were suspended and discovered on a home visit that these 10-year-olds were trying to care for their bedridden mother who has MS and diabetes.
They were her only caregivers. The sisters got her medical help and are giving the boys some stability. Now the boys are free to claim much of the childhood they were losing. Clearly, we all share responsibility for the Matts and Marks in our nation.
In Milwaukee, I met Billy and his wife and two boys at St. Benedict's dining room. Billy's work hours were cut back in the recession. Billy is taking responsibility for himself and his family, but right now without food stamps, he and his wife could not put food on their family table.
We all share responsibility for creating an economy where parents with jobs earn enough to take care of their families. In order to cut taxes for the very wealthy, the Romney-Ryan budget would make it even tougher for hard-working Americans like Billy to feed their families. Paul Ryan says this budget is in keeping with the values of our shared faith. I simply disagree.
In Cincinnati, I met Jini, who had just come from her sister's memorial service. When Jini's sister Margaret lost her job, she lost her health insurance. She developed cancer and had no access to diagnosis or treatment. She died unnecessarily. That is tragic. And it is wrong.
The Affordable Care Act will cover people like Margaret. We all share responsibility to ensure that this vital health care reform law is properly implemented and that all governors expand Medicaid coverage so no more Margarets die from lack of care. This is part of my pro-life stance and the right thing to do.
I have so many other stories but will only tell one more. In Hershey, Pennsylvania, a woman in her late thirties approached us. She asked for the names of some people she could talk to, because she felt alone and isolated. Her neighbors have been polarized by politics masquerading as values. She cares about the well-being of the people in her community.
She wishes they, and the rest of the nation, would listen to one another with kindness and compassion. Listen to one another rather than yell at each other. I told her then, and I tell her now, that she is not alone.
Looking out at you tonight, I feel your presence combined with that of the thousands of caring people we met on our journey. Together, we understand that an immoral budget that hurts already struggling families does not reflect our nation's values. We are better than that.
So I urge you to join us on the bus. Join us as together we stand with Matt and Mark, Billy and his family, the woman in Hershey and the Margarets of our nation.
This is what we nuns on the bus are all about: We care for the 100 percent, and that will secure the blessings of liberty for our nation. So join us as we nuns and all of us drive for faith, family and fairness.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/09/05/1128209/-Transcript-of-Simone-Campbell-remarks-as-prepared-for-delivery-Democratic-National-Convention

Tommy Thompson Hides Past Support For Obamacare 5SEP12 & Tommy Thompson: GOP Governors Should Implement Health Care Exchanges 28JUN11

For some reason Wisconsin gop / tea-bagger politicians have a problem with telling the truth. If tommy thompson r WI candidate has changed his mind on the Affordable Care Act / Obamacare he should say that, but no, he decides to lie and say he didn't support it. Check this out from ThinkProgress...
Former Gov. Tommy Thompson (R-WI)
Former Gov. Tommy Thompson (R-WI)
Former Secretary of Health and Human Services and Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson (R) is again denying his previous support for much of the Affordable Care Act. Nancy-Ann DeParle, President Obama’s healthcare adviser, told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Tuesday that Thompson had been a key backer of the law’s implementation prior to his current Senate campaign. He is the Republican nominee against Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D) for the open seat of retiring Sen. Herb Kohl (D). The paper reports Thompson attended a high-profile implementation strategy meeting, two years ago:
“He was, from what we could tell, working toward implementation,” DeParle said. “I’m not going to say that he agreed with every single provision that ended up in the law – I won’t say that. But he was very helpful in implementation and we asked for his help and he said he would help us.
“Then I don’t know, he decided he’s not for it now but he certainly was then. . . . He seems to have swerved to the right,” she said.
Thompson’s campaign immediately disputed the characterization, claiming he has “has always opposed Obamacare.” A year ago, Thompson told ABC News ” I did not support Obamacare. I’ve come out against Obamacare time and time again.”
But last June, in a Huffington Post editorial, Thompson urged Republican governors to adopt the Affordable Care Act’s health insurance exchanges. Last April, he lauded Obamacare’s payment reform provisions, saying they give “great discretion” for exermination with “alternative payment systems.” He even tried to dissuade Republicans from repealing the measure, telling CNBC in November 2010, “When it’s all said and done, you’re not going to be able to repeal health care because President Obama is not going to sign it… And they don’t have enough votes to override a veto, so why push a cart uphill when you know it’s not going to be able to get to the top?”
Thompson is now apparently eager to “push a cart uphill” — his campaign website lists “repealing Obamacare and replacing it with market-based solutions” among his top legislative priorities.
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/09/05/800171/tommy-thompson-hides-past-support-for-obamacare/

Tommy Thompson: GOP Governors Should Implement Health Care Exchanges

Former Wisconsin Gov. and Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson (R) has long been out of step with today’s conservative Republican orthodoxy. He’s supported the individual mandate, argued against repealing the Affordable Care Act and even opposed portions of the Paul Ryan budget. Now, this potential GOP Senate candidate is going a step further, calling on Republican governors to implement the health care exchanges that are part of the Affordable Care Act:
I am writing to suggest that governors of both political parties have tremendous opportunity to use free market principles and set up health insurance exchanges which work and give constituents freedom of choice. There is a lot of discussion about health insurance exchanges as it relates to President Obama’s Affordable Care Act. Some governors have a negative opinion of insurance exchanges and I believe that by doing so they are giving up a tremendous opportunity to use marketplace choice and allow insurance companies to compete in their respective states. It would be a terrible mistake to have governors give up that opportunity to set up exchanges and forfeit that opportunity back to the federal government which would limit states’ rights and their constituents’ ability to pick and choose the best insurance for themselves and their families.
Now to be clear, Thompson isn’t proposing that Republicans adopt the kind of robust insurance exchanges that Massachusetts and California are pursing — exchanges that act as a prudent purchasers and negotiate price and coverage on behalf of their beneficiaries. He’s calling for something far milder. It’s a model that many Republicans have supported in the past, one that’s rooted in Utah’s flea market-like exchange where any insurance company can offer a plan and consumers could potentially be suckered into some fairly inefficient and costly coverage. That’s a far less effective approach — the Massachusetts Connector has connected about 217,000 people to coverage while Utah’s exchange reached 3,583 enrollees — but at least it’s some kind of start towards implement the health care law rather than resisting it.
And Thompson offers one final warning: “If states do not build an exchange, the Affordable Care Act requires that the Federal government step in and run the exchange…If you give control of the exchange to the Federal government, you also give them control of the Federal Medicaid grant program. Do we really need to provide the Federal government day-to-day control into the largest liability items on the state budget?” That’s a question some Republican governors already know the answer to.
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011/06/28/255762/tommy-thompson-gop-governors-should-implement-health-care-exchanges/

Exclusive: Paul Ryan Quietly Requested Obamacare Cash & Paul Ryan Acknowledges Requesting Federal Money From Program Funded By Obamacare 5&7SEP12

CAUGHT red handed and still the lyin' paul ryan campaign team tries to lie, deceive and manipulate their way out of another example of their blatant hypocrisy. He says it's OK to use federal funds for health care when provided by the bush administration but not when provided by the Obama administration, yet that is exactly what he did. The report from The Nation, including the letter from lyin' ryan's congressional office requesting the funding follows this from ThinkProgress .....
Earlier this week, the Nation uncovered the fact that Paul Ryan — who has voted with his party to repeal President Obama’s health care law over 30 times — requested Obamacare funds for his Wisconsin district in 2010. However, after the news broke that Ryan sought to fund a new community health center with federal money provided through health care reform, his campaign was quick to retort that grant program has nothing to do with supporting Obamacare because it was created under former President George W. Bush.
Bush did create federal grant programs for community health centers during his presidency. But now that Obama is in office, that initiative is funded through Obamacare, which provides $11 billion to expand community health centers. When Ryan requested the funds in 2010, they represented money that Obama approved — under a law that Ryan has referred to as “Washington’s reckless spending spree.”
As the Huffington Post points out, it’s difficult to understand the distinction between Ryan’s support for Bush’s health care spending and his opposition to the exact same health care spending under Obamacare:
But the response from Ryan’s spokesman also raises a question about the candidate’s philosophy on federal spending on health care: Why would he consider dollars approved by Bush to be a good use of money, but funds approved by Obama to be bad?
“Don’t dumb things down,” [Ryan's spokesperson] suggested to HuffPost. “You think he’s opposed to all federal spending on health care? Health care spending makes up a significant portion of his budget.”
On the specific program in question, related to community health centers, Buck said Ryan was merely supporting a constituent. “It’s casework,” he said. “As a general principle he’s not going to turn away his constituents who come to him for help based on his own views of a program.”
Ryan is not alone in his hypocrisy. A laundry list of Republican lawmakers have suggested scrapping Obamacare only to replace it with the exact same health reform measures. When health care reform is acceptable under Republicans but unconstitutional under Obama, GOPers expose themselves as putting partisanship over policy.
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/09/07/811241/paul-ryan-bush-obamacare/?mobile=nc

Exclusive: Paul Ryan Quietly Requested Obamacare Cash

Republican vice-presidential candidate Paul Ryan is barnstorming the country, promising to repeal every provision of the Affordable Care Act if the Romney-Ryan ticket is elected. But a letter he wrote to the Obama administration may undermine this message.
On December 10, 2010, Ryan penned a letter to the Department of Health and Human Services to recommend a grant application for the Kenosha Community Health Center, Inc to develop a new facility in Racine, Wisconsin, an area within Ryan’s district. “The proposed new facility, the Belle City Neighborhood Health Center, will serve both the preventative and comprehensive primary healthcare needs of thousands of new patients of all ages who are currently without healthcare,” Ryan wrote.
Paul Ryan's request for Obamacare funds
The grant Ryan requested was funded directly by the Affordable Care Act, better known simply as healthcare reform or Obamacare.
The letter, among several obtained by The Nation and The Investigative Fund through a Freedom of Information Act request, is a stark reminder that even the most ardent opponents of Obamacare privately acknowledge many of the law’s benefits.
Federally funded health clinics have long provided a broad range of vital medical, dental and mental health services to underprivileged communities across the country, regardless of a persons’ ability to pay. To meet the goal of expanding coverage, the Affordable Care Act provides for a sweeping expansion of such clinics, including $9.5 billion for operating costs to existing community health centers and $1.5 billion for new construction.
In public, Ryan has cultivated a profile as one of health reform’s most outspoken critics. He savages the Affordable Care Act as an example of “Washington’s reckless spending spree,” as “irresponsible,” and has warned repeatedly that it would place the “federal government squarely in the middle of health-care decisions.”
Explaining his “philosophical difference” with Democrats, Ryan told ABC News this summer that he would seek to repeal the “entire law” because healthcare rights come from “nature and God,” not the government. He expressed dismay that the Supreme Court upheld the law during the interview.
Despite Ryan’s quiet support for an Affordable Care Act clinic grant in his district, the Wisconsin congressman’s promise to repeal Obamacare would undermine the law’s five-year plan to rapidly grow the health clinic system in America by withdrawing the necessary funds. The so-called Ryan Budget plan would also decimate other federal support for health clinics, according to an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Before Republicans broadly agreed upon a strategy of opposing any health reform proposal embraced by President Obama, the party once supported access to healthcare using clinics. The Bush administration requested and received modest increases in federal health clinic funding over the years. Now, however, the GOP has made opposing the entire Affordable Care Act a central plank in its platform, and virtually no lawmakers have been willing to praise it while speaking to the media.
Ryan isn’t alone in shaking his fist at health reform with one hand while extending an open palm behind closed doors.
As I reported over a year ago, even Congressman Hal Rogers, a conservative Representative from Kentucky, and former Senator John Ensign, a rising star in the Republican Party before he resigned in disgrace, wrote letters asking for health reform grants while calling for absolute repeal. Rogers called health reform “socialistic” and a “monstrosity.” Nevertheless, he requested Obamacare funds for a nursing clinic in rural Clay County. The money, Rogers said in a letter to the Department of Health and Human Services, would “provide critical care in an area in extreme need of access to adequate healthcare.” Ensign recommended an application for a physician training grant made possible through the Affordable Care Act.
Rogers and Ryan have voted to repeal all of the Affordable Care Act on multiple occasions in the last two years.
“I don’t know what’s the bigger sin,” says Tom Perriello, a former Democratic congressman who championed health clinics as a supporter of the Affordable Care Act. “The hypocrisy of asking for funding from a program while seeking to repeal it, or that the Republicans have been so much more committed to hurting the president than to helping people that something as uncontroversial as funding for community health centers must be requested in secret.”
Perriello is now counselor for policy at the Center for American Progress, where I previously worked as a political blogger.
An outline of the health reform “replacement” legislation advanced by Mitt Romney and Ryan, mostly centered on proposals to gut state and federal health insurance regulations by allowing insurance providers to sell coverage across state lines, makes no mention of health clinics.
In addition to undercutting his political message about health reform, the letter may also add to an emerging narrative that Ryan has a double standard when it comes to critiquing major Obama policy achievements. Shortly after Romney announced that Ryan would be joining him on the Republican ticket this year, the Boston Globe revisited a story showing how Ryan quietly lobbied the Obama administration for stimulus grants. Ryan voted against the proposal and denounced it to the press without disclosing his requests for stimulus cash.
Ryan first denied responsibility for the stimulus grant requests, but later confessed that his office had sent the letters.
Republicans have praised Ryan for his willingness to embrace unpopular cuts to government programs and for being a “consistent conservative.” The fact that Ryan has privately pleaded with the Obama administration for government grants from the president’s signature policy accomplishments, however, could unravel that conceit.
UPDATE: Brendan Buck, a spokesperson for the Mitt Romney campaign, responded to this story by claiming that this "grant program was created by President Bush, not Obamacare. This... type of misinformation is what you get from gotcha reporting on liberal blogs." Ryan's letter directly requests money from the HRSA-11-017 New Access Points program announced in August of 2010. This New Access Points grant program that Ryan requested money from is funded fully by the Affordable Care Act, a fact made clear on multiple government websites. The claim that Bush "created" this program is also unfounded. Federally-funded health centers were created through the Public Health Services Act, legislation signed into law by President Franklin Roosevelt in 1944.  New Access Point grants have existed well before the Bush administration came to office.
For more on fact-checking Paul Ryan, read Eric Alterman’s column this week.
http://www.thenation.com/blog/169757/exclusive-paul-ryan-quietly-requested-obamacare-cash 

11 August 2012

12 Things You Should Know About Vice Presidential Candidate Paul Ryan 11AUG12

paul ryan r WI and mitt romney's pick for his running mate is like Dr Evil's minni-me, but there is nothing to laugh about if you understand the threat this team presents to the middle class, the working class, the working poor, the retired, disabled, women, students, Social Security, Medicare & Medicaid. A primer from Think Progress....

Mitt Romney has picked as his running mate 42 year-old Republican Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI), the architect of the GOP budget, which the New York Times has described as “the most extreme budget plan passed by a house of Congress in modern times.” Below are 12 things you should know about Ryan and his policies:
1. Embraces extreme individualism. Ryan heaped praise on Ayn Rand, a 20th-century libertarian novelist best known for her philosophy that centered on the idea that selfishness is “virtue.” Rand described altruism as “evil,” condemned Christianity for advocating compassion for the poor, viewed the feminist movement as “phony,” and called Arabs “almost totally primitive savages. Though he publicly rejected “her philosophy” in 2012, Ryan had professed himself a strong devotee. “The reason I got involved in public service, by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be Ayn Rand,” he said at a D.C. gathering honoring the author of “Atlas Shrugged” and “The Fountainhead.” “I give out ‘Atlas Shrugged’ as Christmas presents, and I make all my interns read it. Well… I try to make my interns read it.” Learn more about Ryan’s muse:

2. Raises taxes on the middle class, cuts them for millionaires. Paul Ryan’s infamous budget — which Romney embraced — replaces “the current tax structure with two brackets — 25 percent and 10 percent — and cut the top rate from 35 percent.” Federal tax collections would fall “by about $4.5 trillion over the next decade” as a result and to avoid increasing the national debt, the budget proposes massive cuts in social programs and “special-interest loopholes and tax shelters that litter the code.” But 62 percent of the savings would come from programs that benefit the lower- and middle-classes, who would also experience a tax increase. That’s because while Ryan “would extend the Bush tax cuts, which are due to expire at the end of this year, he would not extend President Obama’s tax cuts for those with the lowest incomes, which will expire at the same time.” Households “earning more than $1 million a year, meanwhile, could see a net tax cut of about $300,000 annually.”
Audiences have booed Ryan for the unfair distribution:

3. Dramatically increases Medicare costs for seniors, increases eligibility age. Ryan’s latest budget transforms the existing version of Medicare, in which government provides seniors with a guaranteed benefit, into a “premium support” system. All future retirees would receive a government contribution to purchase insurance from an exchange of private plans or traditional fee-for-service Medicare. But since the premium support voucher does not keep up with increasing health care costs, the Congressional Budget Offices estimates that new beneficiaries could pay up to $1,200 more by 2030 and more than $5,900 more by 2050. A recent study also found that had the plan been implemented in 2009, 24 million beneficiares enrolled in the program would have paid higher premiums to maintain their choice of plan and doctors. Ryan would also raise Medicare’s age of eligibility to 67.
4. Leaves Social Security to the whims of Wall Street. In September of 2011, Ryan agreed with Rick Perry’s characterization of Social Security as a “Ponzi scheme” and since 2005 has advocated for privatizing the retirement benefit and investing it in stocks and bonds. Conservatives claim that this would “outperform the current formula based on wages earned and overall wage appreciation,” but the economic crisis of 2008 should serve as a wake-up call for policymakers who seek to hinge Americans’ retirement on the stock market. In fact, “a person with a private Social Security account similar to what President George W. Bush proposed in 2005″ would have lost much of their retirement savings.
5. Budget would result in 4.1 million lost jobs in 2 years. Ryan’s budget calls for massive reductions in government spending. He has proposed cutting discretionary programs by about $120 billion over the next two years and mandatory programs by $284 billion, which, the Economic Policy Institute estimates, would suck demand out of the economy and “reduce employment by 1.3 million jobs in fiscal 2013 and 2.8 million jobs in fiscal 2014, relative to current budget policies.”
6. Eliminates Pell Grants for more more than 1 million students. Ryan’s budget claims both that rising financial aid is driving college tuition costs upward, and that Pell Grants, which help cover tuition costs for low-income Americans, don’t go to the “truly needy.” So he cuts the Pell Grant program by $200 billion, which could “ultimately knock more than one million students off” the program over the next 10 years.
7. Keeps $40 billion in subsidies for Big Oil. In 2011, Ryan joined all House Republicans and 13 Democrats in his vote to keep Big Oil tax loopholes as part of the FY 2011 spending bill. His budget would retain a decade’s worth of oil tax breaks worth $40 billion, while cutting “billions of dollars from investments to develop alternative fuels and clean energy technologies that would serve as substitutes for oil.” For instance, it “calls for a $3 billion cut in energy programs in FY 2013 alone” and would spend only $150 million over five years — or 20 percent of what was invested in 2012 — on energy programs.
8. Family stands to benefit from oil subsidies. Ryan “and his wife, Janna, own stakes in four family companies that lease land in Texas and Oklahoma to the very energy companies that benefit from the tax subsidies in Ryan’s budget plan,” the Daily Beast reported in June of 2011. “Ryan’s father-in-law, Daniel Little, who runs the companies, told Newsweek and The Daily Beast that the family companies are currently leasing the land for mining and drilling to energy giants such as Chesapeake Energy, Devon, and XTO Energy, a recently acquired subsidiary of ExxonMobil.”
9. Claimed Romneycare has led to “rationing and benefit cuts.” “I’m not a fan of [Romney's health care reform] system,” Ryan told C-SPAN in 2010. He argued that government is rationing care in the state and claimed that people are “seeing the system bursting by the seams, they’re seeing premium increases, rationing and benefit cuts.” He called the system “a fatal conceit” and “unsustainable.” Watch it:

10. Believes that Romneycare is “not that dissimilar to Obamacare.” Though Romney has gone to great lengths to distinguish his Massachusetts health care law from Obamacare, Romney doesn’t see the difference. “It’s not that dissimilar to Obamacare, and you probably know I’m not a big fan of Obamacare,” Ryan said at a breakfast meeting sponsored by the American Spectator in March of 2011. “I just don’t think the mandates work … all the regulation they’ve put on it…I think it’s beginning to death spiral. They’re beginning to have to look at rationing decisions.”
11. Accused generals of lying about their support for Obama’s military budget. In March, Ryan couldn’t believe that Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey supports Obama’s Pentagon budget, which incorporates $487 billion in cuts over 10 years. “We don’t think the generals are giving us their true advice,” Ryan said at a policy summit hosted by the National Journal. “We don’t think the generals believe that their budget is really the right budget.” He later apologized for the implication. Watch it:

12. Co-sponsored a personhood amendment. Ryan joined 62 other Republicans in co-sponsoring the Sanctity of Human Life Act, which declares that a fertilized egg “shall have all the legal and constitutional attributes and privileges of personhood.” This would outlaw abortion, some forms of contraception and invitro fertilization.
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/08/11/677171/12-things-you-should-know-about-vice-presidential-candidate-paul-ryan/?mobile=nc

"GREET" MITT ROMNEY & PAUL RYAN IN MANASSAS, VA SATURDAY 11AUG12 &Romney Chooses Rep. Paul Ryan As Running Mate 11AUG12 & Catholic Leaders to Rep. Paul Ryan: Stop Distorting Church Teaching to Justify Immoral Budget & Catholic theologians denounce Paul Ryan's budget 13APR12

mitt romney has made it official by choosing rep paul ryan r WI as his running mate; CLASS WARFARE AND AN ALL OUT ASSAULT ON SOCIAL JUSTICE ARE THE FOUNDATION OF THE REPIGLICAN / TEA-BAGGER PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN. From NPR...
House Budget Committee Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis. introduces Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney on April 3, 2012.
Enlarge M. Spencer Green/AP House Budget Committee Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis. introduces Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney on April 3, 2012.
Update at 8 a.m. ET. It's Official:
We're following the story now over at It's All Politics — Romney Picks Wisconsin's Ryan To Be His Running Mate On GOP Ticket.
Update at 1:30 a.m. ET:
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has chosen Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, the chairman of the House Budget Committee, to be his running mate, the Associated Press and other media organizations are reporting.
The Romney campaign said in press release that he will officially announce his choice Saturday morning in Norfolk, Va., at the Nauticus Museum following a tour of the USS Wisconsin.
Last month, NPR's Andrea Seabrook reported on what would make Ryan a strong pick for Romney, among them his budget plan and conservative pedigree. Seabrook, however, also reported on some potential backlash:
Last year, fresh from the House vote that passed his budget, Ryan met angry constituents outside a town hall meeting in Kenosha, Wis. Inside the meeting, Ryan tried to explain his budget's cuts to future Medicare benefits and its lower corporate tax rates, but was interrupted by protesters.
This is the real danger for Romney if he were to pick Ryan — igniting the anger of voters who favor a stronger safety net, including seniors and many independents.
Ryan's plan would slash social spending — from Head Start to health care — while cutting taxes on businesses and the wealthy. The Obama campaign has seized on this, calling the plan the "Romney-Ryan budget."
There's some evidence that narrative could work for Democrats.
The New York Times reports that both Tim Pawlenty, former governor of Minnesota, and Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio received phone calls thanking them for their cooperation in the vetting process and their help with his campaign effort, but that they were not Romney's pick. The Times goes on to also speculate about a Ryan pick:
"Three senior Republicans said that the location of the announcement at the U.S.S. Wisconsin on Saturday was a clever hint by the Romney campaign that Mr. Ryan, the chairman of the Budget Committee, has emerged as a leading contender for the position.
Two top advisers to Mr. Romney declined to provide more details late Friday, saying that Mr. Romney valued the secretive process that has been carried out throughout the four-month search for a running mate.
...
If Mr. Romney chooses Mr. Ryan, one of the leading figures of the fiscal conservative movement, the pair would present a Republican ticket that offers a sharp distinction for voters to decide which party has the better answer to tackle the country's deep financial burdens."
The official announcement is scheduled for 9 a.m. EDT, and will kick off a four-day bus tour through several swing states: Virginia, Florida, Ohio and North Carolina.
NPR will carry live coverage of the announcement with analysis to follow on Weekend Edition Saturday and on NPR.org.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/08/10/158606908/mitt-romney-to-announce-running-mate-saturday?sc=nl&cc=brk-20120811-0148

Catholic Leaders to Rep. Paul Ryan: Stop Distorting Church Teaching to Justify Immoral Budget & Catholic theologians denounce Paul Ryan's budget 13APR12

FAIR IS FAIR, but rep paul ryan's repiglican / tea-bagger budget proposal isn't fair. As a Catholic he doesn't hesitate to use the Bishops in his war on women, but why should he be able to cherry pick the Catholic tenants he does and doesn't follow? As a Catholic he knows he isn't supposed. Here's a chance to remind rep ryan of the U.S. Catholic Bishop's condemnation of his budget proposal. Click the link to send him a fax (for free) of the Bishop's statement, and be sure to read the statement from the Church.......
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/04/13/1083166/-Catholic-theologians-denounce-Paul-Ryan-s-budget?detail=hide
It seems there are at least some prominent Catholics that aren't willing to put up with the hokum of Paul Ryan claiming that his screw-the-poor budget proposals are based on his "Catholic faith":

“If Rep. Ryan thinks a budget that takes food and healthcare away from millions of vulnerable people upholds Catholic values, then he also probably believes Jesus was a Tea Partier who lectured the poor to stop being so lazy and work harder,” said Gehring. “This budget turns centuries of Catholic social teaching on its head. These Catholic leaders and many Catholics in the pews are tired of faith being misused to bless an immoral agenda.” Indeed, 59 Catholic leaders and theologians took issue with Ryan’s claims, signing a scathing letter that slammed the Ryan budget plan.
Ryan had previously said that the "social magisterium" of the church governed his own ideas, and proceeded to roundly butcher the whole notion, claiming that being Catholic meant, well, believing that crap Paul Ryan says. This has not been going over well. Here's the statement in full. No word yet on whether Congress will be calling these Catholic leaders and theologians to hearings about the Ryan plan. I can only presume that since the Republicans are now best buddies with my old church, they'll get right on that. Or, and I suppose this is more likely, we're about to hear why Paul Ryan knows more about Catholic teachings than the people who actually teach them.
If you would like to fax Mr. Ryan a copy of the letter from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops denouncing his budget, which makes for a fine little read itself, you can do so here.

Catholic Leaders to Rep. Paul Ryan: Stop Distorting Church Teaching to Justify Immoral Budget

Posted by Casey Schoeneberger
Nearly 60 prominent theologians, priests, nuns and national Catholic social justice leaders released a statement today refuting Rep. Paul Ryan’s claim that his GOP budget proposal reflects Catholic teaching on care for the poor, which he made in an interview earlier this week with the Christian Broadcasting Network. The group of Catholic leaders — including a former high-ranking U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops official, a priest in Rep. Ryan’s district and the leadership team of the Sisters of Mercy of the Americas — called on Ryan to “reconsider his radical budget proposal and refrain from distorting Church teaching.”
“If Rep. Ryan thinks a budget that takes food and healthcare away from millions of vulnerable people upholds Catholic values, then he also probably believes Jesus was a Tea Partier who lectured the poor to stop being so lazy and work harder,” said John Gehring, Catholic Outreach Coordinator at Faith in Public Life. “This budget turns centuries of Catholic social teaching on its head. These Catholic leaders and many Catholics in the pews are tired of faith being misused to bless an immoral agenda.”
The leaders wrote: “Simply put, this budget is morally indefensible and betrays Catholic principles of solidarity, just taxation and a commitment to the common good. A budget that turns its back on the hungry, the elderly and the sick while giving more tax breaks to the wealthiest few can’t be justified in Christian terms.”
Robert Greenstein, President of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, released an analysis last month that found the Ryan budget would “likely produce the largest redistribution of income from the bottom to the top in modern U.S. history and likely increase poverty and inequality more than any other budget in recent times (and possibly in the nation’s history).” Mr. Greenstein described the budget proposal as making “extraordinary cuts in programs that serve as a lifeline for our nation’s poorest and most vulnerable citizens.”
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops recently sent a letter to Congressional leaders calling on Congress to protect food stamps, affordable housing and other programs that help the poor from harmful budget cuts. Ryan’s plan did not heed the bishops’ request.
The full statement with signatories is below.
As Catholic social justice leaders, women religious, priests, theologians and other concerned Catholics, we are deeply troubled that Rep. Paul Ryan – chairman of the House Budget Committee – is defending a budget proposal that makes dangerous cuts to food stamps and other vital protections for the most vulnerable as compatible with the teachings of his Catholic faith. Simply put, this budget is morally indefensible and betrays Catholic principles of solidarity, just taxation and a commitment to the common good. A budget that turns its back on the hungry, the elderly and the sick while giving more tax breaks to the wealthiest few can’t be justified in Christian terms.
In a letter to the House of Representatives last month, Catholic bishops wrote that “a just framework for future budgets cannot rely on disproportionate cuts in essential services to poor persons; it requires shared sacrifice by all, including raising adequate revenues, eliminating unnecessary military and other spending, and addressing the long-term costs of health insurance and retirement programs fairly.” Bishops also called for repealing “cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program” and asked Congress to consider the “human and moral dimensions” of budget choices. Rep. Ryan has ignored this vision. Instead, he proposes to dismantle Medicare as we know it, slash food assistance for struggling families and turn Medicaid into inadequate state block grants at a time when most states are struggling to pay their bills. The dramatic growth in military spending is untouched. Addressing our national debt is essential, but balancing budgets on the backs of the poor and working families is flawed public policy and morally bankrupt.
Rep. Ryan claims his budget reflects the Catholic principle of “subsidiarity.” But he profoundly distorts this teaching to fit a narrow political ideology guided by anti-government fervor and libertarian faith in radical individualism. This is anathema to the Catholic social tradition. In fact, ever since Pope Leo XIII’s 1891 encyclical, Rerum Novarum, Catholic social teaching has recognized a positive role for government and our collective responsibility to care for our neighbors. It was another Ryan — Msgr. John Ryan — who in 1919 worked with Catholic bishops on a visionary plan that called for minimum wages, insurance for the elderly and unemployed, labor rights and housing for workers. The “Bishops’ Program for Social Reconstruction” recognized that free markets and self-reliance alone were not enough. These proposals eventually helped inform historic New Deal programs that for the first time sought to buffer families from the cruel vagaries of profit-driven markets that had little concern for human dignity. Subsidiarity recognizes that those social institutions closest to the human person — families, communities, churches — can effectively respond to human needs. But subsidiarity, according to Church teaching, also insists that government has a responsibility to serve the common good when these institutions are unable to address the more systemic issues of poverty, inadequate health care, environmental degradation and other societal challenges.
We urge Rep. Ryan to reconsider his radical budget proposal and refrain from distorting Church teaching to give moral cover to a budget that fails to live up to our nation’s best values and highest ideals.
Click the link below to go to "Faith in Public Life" to see the signatories of this statement
http://www.faithinpubliclife.org/newsroom/press/catholic-leaders-to-rep-paul-ryan-stop-distorting-church-teaching-to-justify-immoral-budget/ 

"GREET" MITT ROMNEY IN MANASSAS, VA SATURDAY 11AUG12

mitt romney is bringing his propaganda campaign to Manassas, VA this Saturday 11AUG12. MoveOn.org is calling for volunteers to greet his guest at the Harris Pavilion, click the link to sign up and for more information.....
We're showing up at Mitt Romney's stop in Manassas on Saturday, August 11, at 2:45 p.m. We'll greet him with signs and ask why he wants to raise taxes on middle class families by $2,000. Can you make it?  

Yes I'll be there!
This Saturday in Manassas, you can help expose Mitt Romney's disastrous economic plan. In short, he wants to raise taxes up to $2,000 on the average American family in order to give millionaires like Romney an$87,000 tax cut.1 
Mitt's launching a four-day swing state tour dubbed "Mitt Romney's Plan for a Stronger Middle Class," and MoveOn members are mobilizing at each stop on the tour to make sure voters know the truth: He's running for president of the 1%. 
This election is just too critical to let Romney mislead swing state voters—so at the same time we're organizing massive protests, we're also hitting the airwaves with a hilarious new ad titled "Pickpocket." It features Mitt reaching into the pockets of average Americans to give the rich another handout—like Robin Hood in reverse. 
For our on-the-ground and airwave plan to work, we need a big presence at Romney's stop in Manassas. With a big protest, we can get the attention of the media and spread our message further. Every last person makes a difference at these events. 
The event is Saturday, August 11, at 2:45 p.m. in Manassas. Can you make it?
Since the news about Mitt's missing tax returns first broke, MoveOn members have organized over 100 protests at Romney offices and have been showing up at his campaign events nationwide to demand that he release his tax returns. MoveOn members like you have helped get a TON of media attention at these events, generating hundreds of press hits exposing Romney as the candidate for the 1%—including a story on the home page of The New York Times.
We can't compete dollar-for-dollar with the millions that Romney and his Super PACs are throwing at the election. But we are 7 million strong—and when MoveOn members organize smart and strategic protests, we can get the word out to swing state voters. 
Can you join us in Manassas on Saturday, August 11, at 2:45 p.m.?
Thanks for all you do. 
–Lenore, Susan, Tim, Elena, and the rest of the team
Sources: 
1. "New Analysis Shows Romney Tax Plan Would Raise Taxes On Middle Class Families By More Than $2,000," ThinkProgress.org, August 1, 2012   
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=278200&id=48354-17549061-dsvMF4x&t=4
2. "Romney Mines the Hamptons for Campaign Cash," The New York Times, July 8, 2012  
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=277144&id=48354-17549061-dsvMF4x&t=5
http://bucknacktssordidtawdryblog.blogspot.com/2012/08/greet-mitt-romney-in-manassas-va.html