Archive for details schmetails

GOP: The party of no ideazzzzzzz


The GOP is "the party of big ideas”? Seriously? Don't make me laugh.

Actual policy plans? Oh come now.

Solutions to real problems? Feh.

Meaningful proposals? Puh-leeze!

Details Americans can hang their collective hats on? Hardly.

Ultra super duper double whammy partisan rhetoric? Now you're talkin'.

Then again, Republicans have had, erm, difficulty accepting reality.

Jonathan Bernstein at Salon draws our attention to the rehashitude of the more outspoken up-and-coming "leaders" of the party, or as I like to call them, deficient blowhards:

Start with Jindal. An alleged policy guy, he ... had all of two ideas: a Balanced Budget Amendment and term limits. In other words, the same old ideas that Republicans have been trotting out since …well, certainly since the Reagan administration. [...]

Marco Rubio? ...  His big idea, as Dave Weigel reported this week, turns out to be the exact same policy ideas that Republicans have been giving for some time now but labeling each one as a benefit for the “middle class.” Which mainly involves reciting the words “middle class.” [...]

Paul Ryan... as Jonathan Chait put it... has “no policy to offer the poor other than the incentive of being hungrier and sicker.”

And the money line:

For the last several years, the way to get a big reaction in conservative circles is to make a teleprompter or a birther joke, not to bring up unsolved problems in the nation.

Wake up GOP. The self-described Big Idea Party has devolved into a slumber party. And you know what they say:


VIDEO: What's the deal with Republicans and their refusal to provide details? Talkin' to you this time, Boehner.


To go all Seinfeldian for a moment, what's the deal with Republicans and their refusal to provide details? Remember this collection of GOP evasion and secrecy?

Etc., etc., ad nauseam.

Republicans just can't seem to learn from their mistakes, because here we go again.  Then again, if Americans knew the details of their plans... fugetaboutit.

Today at a press conference, John Boehner said the following:


There has been no serious discussion of spending cuts so far. And unless there is, there is a real danger of going off the fiscal cliff. [...] So right now all eyes are on the White House…It’s time for the President, Congressional Democrats to tell the American people what spending cuts they’re willing to make.


So your 2011 position still stands, then? I mean, are you still offering, those talks from 2011, is that still the basis here?


Listen, I’m not going to get into the details, but it’s very clear what kind of spending cuts need to occur, but we have no idea what the White House is willing to do.

Pot. Kettle. Elusive.

Think Progress:

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) called on President Obama and Democrats to specify entitlement cuts that could balance their desires for tax increases in a hypothetical deal to avert the so-called “fiscal cliff,” even though only Republicans have demanded spending cuts to programs like Medicare and Social Security. Despite their support for putting entitlement programs on the chopping block, GOP lawmakers have refused to specify how, or by how much, they would cut the programs.

First, it's not a "fiscal cliff," more like a "fiscal bluff," and a crisis of their own making. Second, they're not entitlements, they're earned benefits.

And third, killing Medicare is not an option, voucherizing is not an option, avoiding direct questions is not an option, but this sure is: Liberals double down: No entitlement cuts.


Paul Ryan would play "leading role" if Romney wins. Then why won't he answer any questions?


I got this email alert today. Since I'm not a subscriber, my access is limited, but here's the tease:

Paul Ryan Is Said to be Planning an Active Role: Representative Paul D. Ryan expects to play a leading role in a Romney administration’s drive to enact a budget-shrinking government and overhauling programs like Medicare.

Two things: One is the obvious concern over their agenda. They want to turn Medicare into a voucher system that will cost more out of pocket, and they'd love to cut things like, oh, let's see... FEMA. And that's just for starters.

But the other thing is this: Romney-Ryan’s shunning the press. Both of these cowards are refusing to answer questions, neither will be interviewed and haven't been for weeks. So what we got (or didn't get) during their campaign was a conspicuous lack of details about their policies and plans, a press blackout, and a whole lot of lies.

Yet if-- and that's a big if-- they win on Tuesday, Paul Ryan would suddenly become very visible and is already previewing the horror story that will become the United States of America should they gain the powers they crave so much. He aspires to be the next Dick Cheney, and we all know how that turned out.


Romney-Ryan's fear of the press


I previously posted this:

Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Willard M. Romney’s real closing argument is M.I.A. Why? Because his closing argument is “Don’t ask, because I won’t tell.” He won’t answer a question because he has no answers. And he has no answers because his policies are inferior, destructive to Americans, would sink this country, are discriminatory, and don’t actually exist anyway. Romnesia’s like that.

Details? What are those? Details schmetails.

Facts? What are those? Facts schmacts.

Integrity? What’s that? Integrity inschmegrity.

Amazingly, Romney hasn’t held an interview in over three weeks. Think about that. A candidate for president of the United States, leader of the free world, is afraid of the press.

That's pretty important. Think about it for a moment. The guy who wants to lead the country won't give the people of his country details about his tax returns, his policies, won't answer questions, lies a lot, and-- ta-daaa!-- refuses to give interviews.

Now his running mate is following suit. Politico is reporting that Paul Ryan has gone dark:

[S]ince the week of the vice presidential debate, Ryan has gone dark on battleground reporters — doing no local television and only a handful of network interviews and syndicated radio shows. [...]

Ryan aides shot down the theory that Ryan avoided local interviews to dodge Mourdock-related questions, saying flatly that wasn’t true.

Romney and Ryan aides instead argued that the vice presidential nominee no longer needed the earned media in the final days of the campaign as much as he did when Ryan plucked him out of virtual obscurity to those outside-the-Beltway [...]

In explaining the sudden dip in Ryan’s presence on local television airwaves, campaign aides pointed to the fact that Vice President Joe Biden rarely sits for local interviews.

Using the old, "Well THEY do it!" isn't exactly effective, let alone credible.

Truth is, they just don't want him opening his big ultra-conservative mouth before Tuesday, just as Romney has avoided questions like the plague. They both know they'd bungle it, plus both prefer to keep us all in the dark about those pesky specifics that they know would turn voters off quicker than they can Etch their next Sketch.

Rachel Maddow noticed "Where's Pauldo's" diminishing presence back on October 26th:

Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

“The election is a week from Tuesday. You’re in Alabama? Is Alabama swinging this year?”