Ryan broke with Simpson-Bowles because ObamaCare was off limits to its deliberations. That doesn't excuse Obama for ignoring the Commission, and doing nothing else on the deficit.

the tea party is driven to get the president out of office (via the ballot box that is)

Ryan broke with Simpson-Bowles because ObamaCare was off limits to its deliberations. That doesn't excuse Obama for ignoring the Commission, and doing nothing else on the deficit.

I have a real hard time finding any fault in how Libya went down. I think it was pitch-perfect foreign policy.

congressman ryan voted no on simpson-bowles for political reasons. the medicare story was a dodge. intellectually plausible but it was not the reason

FOR ##### SAKE! YOU'RE THE ####### PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING THE FACT CHECKING!

Republicans also thought Sarah Palin did great 4 years ago. No real shocker here.

I have a real hard time finding any fault in how Libya went down. I think it was pitch-perfect foreign policy.

Unless you live in Mali.

FOR ##### SAKE! YOU'RE THE ####### PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING THE FACT CHECKING!



Eh, I don't have a problem with this. Tomorrow is the time to start talking about what was said, tonight you talk about how he said it. Its no different than a state of the union address. The night of its all about the crowd and the response and whether the speech worked. People start digging into issues the next day. From what I've seen CNN won't have a problem arguing facts with Paul Ryan.

Especially in Janesville where we were about to lose a major factory. A lot of guys I went to high school with worked at that G.M. plant. Right there at that plant, candidate Obama said, ``I believe that if our government is there to support you, this plant will be here for another 100 years.''
That's what he said in 2008. Well, as it turned out, that plant didn't last another year. It is locked up and empty to this day.

The plant he's talking about closed in December 2008, before Obama took office.

Great night of speeches. Condi, Martinez, and Ryan all hit home runs.

Nah. Ryan was shadow-boxing with his multiple lies, so Obama didn't have to worry.

If you want to argue for involvement in Mali, we can discuss that - but Gaddafi was an unchecked debacle throughout his career for Africa.

Did anyone else just watch McCain's speech?

And there is nothing different between Libya and Syria. They're virtually identical places, situations, and geopolitical issues.

Silly rabbit Ray doesn't do personal attacks, just ask him.

Palin did do great 4 years ago. It was everything she said between then and the election that sunk her. I don't figure these are about winning votes, but consolidating and exiting the base. Palin did a fine job of that.

John McCain is deep into his Dr. Strangelove phase. I get though the pushback against the liberal narrative of McCain as the man who has betrayed his true self. That's wish fulfillment. This is his true self. Bombs away, suckers! He's one of the most frightening figures I've ever seen. The neocons seem genuinely crazy to me in that they don't think military action can ever bring bad effects. But McCain in a way; it isn't that he thinks war will work; it's that at this point he drools at the mention of it.

If I'm Joe Biden, I have my wife fake some kind of serious illness right as the debate starts. "Sorry, gotta go ..."

The format is utterly incapable of delivering the kind of rhetorical slaughter you imagine.

Didn't Ryan vote for Bush's stimulus?

like most sane people

it's about punishing sluts.

as long as you don't care about the political consequences of the reaction.

I do not find them galling enough to deny people abortions -- again, bad public policy -- but I'm not overly thrilled with the decisions being made that lead up to most abortions.

At the very least, condoms are cheaper than abortions.

Ryan deserves no wiggle room on the issue.

This speech is a stinker. his biggest reaction was for making fun of Mitt Romney's musical taste.

Ryan's speech was instantly forgettable, at times downright boring. No one will remember it by Friday.

People who think Ryan is going to kill Biden at the debates or something are totally delusional, and are getting Joe Biden media caricature mixed up with the real thing. Biden is not my idea of an ideal politician, but he is not going to be rattled by a lightweight phony like PR. Oh, and his speech will be better too. "We Can Do This?" Why not add a "bro" at the end there.

Anyway, I think if you are pro-life then rape exemptions are ########. Either you believe the embryo is a human life or you don't.

Yes, rape exemptions are totally nonsensical. If, like most sane people, you don't believe a rape victim should have to carry her rapist's child to term, then the answer is not an ethically empty "rape exemption" but to admit that you are actually pro choice.

You seem unfamiliar with the concept of competing interests.

This is true of tons and tons of medical procedures. Think of all the money that gets spent on chemical therapies for cancer caused by smoking, all the trauma surgeon paychecks cashed because people shot at each other with guns or tried to climb a rock face without proper safety gear, and so on. Medical procedures that are borne of poor decisions are happening every single day, and we don't pass laws forcing people to forgo medical care on that account. The idea that the government should force women responsible people to remain pregnant subsidize irresponsible people against their will smacks of the worst kind of moralistic immoral government intervention.

And there is nothing different between Libya and Syria. They're virtually identical places, situations, and geopolitical issues.

With regards to Obamacare, fixed.

What "competing interest" in cases of rape trumps the right to life of the fetus?

You do realize that there is a failure rate for contraceptives right?

Medical procedures that are borne of poor decisions are happening every single day

We stuck our noses in Libya even though it was not in our national interest. As a proximate result of our interference, an African democracy next door has been overthrown.

This really strikes me as the kind of glee you'll be mocking during the DNC.

This really strikes me as the kind of glee you'll be mocking during the DNC.

"Don't worry, guys! Next week we have Joe Biden, Charlie Crist, and Sandra Fluke!"

LOL.

Among other considerations, a non-zero number of women develop serious health problems as a result of being pregnant. A non-zero number of women die during childbirth. An argument can be made that while the life created by rape might be innocent, it's immoral to impose such serious health risks on a woman who was raped.

The medical system already does precisely that. So long as we have guaranteed emergency care, the healthy are subsidizing the sick whether they want to or not. The question is whether (a) we want to cease guaranteeing emergency care for the "irresponsible" or (b) we want to subsidize this care in a more economical and just way.

Anyway, I think if you are pro-life then rape exemptions are ########. Either you believe the embryo is a human life or you don't.

Yes, rape exemptions are totally nonsensical. If, like most sane people, you don't believe a rape victim should have to carry her rapist's child to term, then the answer is not an ethically empty "rape exemption" but to admit that you are actually pro choice.

I am interested in whether this means, Jason, that you found McCain's speech calling for intervention in Syria to be as distasteful as you found the Obama administration's Libya policy?

It's immoral to impose such serious health risks on any woman in the absence of competing interests. You are doing precisely what Weekly Journalist said - you are advocating for regulations in order to punish women for having consensual sex.

Not nearly to the extent that Obamacare does. The removal of preexisting conditions limitations and the new limitations on insurance companies' ability to charge premiums on risk-based factors makes Obamacare a huge and immoral giveaway to millions of the most irresponsible people in America.

There's a big difference between a woman who engages in sexual intercourse voluntarily, knowing pregnancy can result, and a woman who is raped.

The answer is pretty straightforward. While rape is obviously wrong, the child so conceived shouldn't be punished for the rapist's crime. Compelling the mother to bring the child to term is the lesser of two evils.

I don't actually believe any of that, mind you, but the answer isn't that hard to give and it's entirely consistent with the abortion=murder idea. It's just very few people will actually agree with you when you give that answer. If taking a principled position that very few people agree with is digging a hole for yourself, then I suppose that's a hole you'll have to live with. It's either that or you change principles.

And -
Irresponsible = Have a preexisting condition.

It's immoral to impose such serious health risks on any woman in the absence of competing interests. You are doing precisely what Weekly Journalist said - you are advocating for regulations in order to punish women for having consensual sex.

You're misunderstanding the pro-life argument.

Government is preventing the mother from harming a 3rd party (the baby) who has it's own rights, independent of the mother.

Yes, a huge number of preexisting conditions are the result of irresponsibility. Not all preexisting conditions date back to one's birth.