Paul Ryan is very concerned.
In a USA Today column, the Ayn Rand acolyte says that Obama is “interested in tax reform for corporations, not for families or small business,” adding “the President claims his economic agenda is for the middle class, but it’s actually for the well-connected.”
He said that. Really.
I learned this from Dana Milbank who, in his column this morning, sees other Republicans picking up on that meme.
To further illustrate that they can say pretty much anything and be taken seriously, there’s this:
John Boehner, asked at a news conference this week about Obama’s series of speeches on the economy, replied: “If I had poll numbers as low as his, I’d probably be out doing the same thing if I were him.”
He said that. Really.
Milbank comes to the only possible conclusion:
Obama’s that rare socialist who is in bed with big business . . . Republicans haven’t decided whether Obama’s a socialist or a plutocrat, a tyrant or a weakling, arrogant or apologetic.
* I probably don’t have to add this, but it’s irresistible. A year ago (and probably last week as well) Ryan accused Obama of supporting “a government-run economy” and of ‘denigrating people who are successful”. He charged the president with leading the nation toward a “cradle-to-grave, European style welfare state.”
He said that too. Really.
** UPDATE: My daily alert from The Patriot Post just popped into my mailbox and lookee here: Editor Mark Alexander isn’t aboard with Mr. Ryan. Alexander is offended by those economic policy speeches coming from one “Barack Hussein Obama”:
Obama has been regurgitating the same phony talking points since then, insisting the economy is improving but stirring the class-warfare pot claiming the middle class and poor are not keeping pace. Naturally, he suggests the solution is more taxes and government spending.
Hey, as it says above, whatever works.
You can have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, or democracy. But you cannot have both.
Whatever Works 
Hey Moe, all this stuff makes sense – if you’re receptive to start with and don’t actually analyze it. It’s called demagoguery. Lest we forget, this please from its Wikipedia page:
And this,
LikeLike
Mencken perfectly describes Limbaugh.
LikeLike
Throw everything you can possibly think of at the wall–something’s bound to stick.
LikeLike
Ojmo – it seems to me it ALL sticks and the contradictions don’t seem to upset the faithful.
LikeLike
Ha, I read that column too and loved it. He also describes how Newt Gingrich contradicted himself a couple of times when it came to what he thought should be done in Syria.
The Republicans know Obama is evillll, they just can’t decide exactly what kind of villain he’s supposed to be, which speaks to an emotional hatred rather than rational opposition.
LikeLike
brat, that Gingrich stuff was so yummy I posted from Milbank’s column twice! I never used to read him, but he seems to be maturing and suddenly worth reading. Do you sense that too?
LikeLike
I have to admit that Milbank has not been my choice of reading that often…somehow I always end up choosing other columnists. I loved this one, though, and am glad you posted from it twice 🙂
LikeLike