Welcome Aboard, Paul

I've always been hot and cold about Paul Ryan. On the one had, he has two first names. Pretty legit. Also, though not quite as substantively, he is a real deficit hawk. A darling of the Tea Party, Ryan is one lawmaker who actually understands the deficit, and is passionate about reducing it. His selection as Romney's running mate brings two things to the Romney campaign of which it was previously utterly devoid: conviction and principle. Paul Ryan desperately wants to cut federal spending, and he is serious about it, he is willing to make tough decisions about entitlement spending that others aren't willing to tackle.

And that's where the good ends. While Paul Ryan certainly cares about cutting spending, it is impossible to say that he cares about deficit reduction, assuming that he can do basic arithmetic. Ryan's plan wouldn't bring in a surplus for the next three decades, and almost all of his spending cuts ($6 trillion) would be used to pay for tax cuts ($4 trillion), the vast majority of which would go to the super-rich and corporations. In short, Ryan is another demagogue for trickle-down economics, a belief system with absolutely no data to back it up.

I respect Paul Ryan's strident belief that the deficit will ruin America only to the extent that he believes it himself, but I can't determine how much he believes it. No one who actually wants to cut the deficit would propose a plan like Paul Ryan's, at least no one who is adept at the use of mathematics and data. Slashing spending in a depressed economy and giving even more money to the wealthy is neither the prescription for an economic recovery nor the blueprint for a healthy future. Paul Ryan posses conviction, but his plan is lacking in the extreme. It has been accurately termed Robin Hood in reverse as the people set to benefit the most are those who need it least, while those we should be helping climb out of poverty would be strapped with a higher burden! It is a moral travesty and a failed economic policy repackaged behind the facade of deficit reduction of which it does very little!

President Obama put it best when he described Ryan's plan as "deeply pessimistic," and said it tell us, we can’t afford the America that I believe in and I think you believe in."

The President nailed it. Basic math suggests Ryan's plan doesn't do all the much deficit reduction, but even if it does, at what cost? Ryan proposes to turn America into a millionaire's playground with a military. Is that what we want? A nation with no future, no hope, and not even a budget surplus for the next 30 years? No thank you, I'll pass. Paul Ryan's budget is impressive in it's scope and scale, but even Newt "Nuts" Gingrich had the sense to call it "right-wing social engineering." Newt Gingrich thinks the Palestinians are an invented people, so if even he had that to say, what is left to belittle? Paul Ryan has a vision for America's future that leaves behind most Americans. It is one that we should all disavow.

Finally, and most discouragingly, both Ryan and Mitt Romney sidestep attacks on this plan by touting how courageous they are, making tough decisions about America's future while the President shows no leadership. I grant them that Obama's plans do not go far enough, though I contend that the President would have us on more solid footing if he wasn't opposed by Republicans on everything. Still, in an ideal world, Obama wins a second term and does more to put the country on solid fiscal footing.

So while I'm receptive to the whole "Obama needs to do more" argument, it is nothing short of a horrible joke to suggest that Republicans are leading anyone anywhere on the issue of deficit reduction. I could point out that Bush's Medicare Prescription Plan, passed by a Republican Congress, cost more than Obamacare and did nothing to lower costs. I could point to the unnecessary war in Iraq that costs hundreds of billions for nothing. I could even mention - again - that trickle down economics is a theory with no data to support it, and that it fails to spur economic growth. And finally, I could point out that in order to reduce the deficit we need higher taxes on the super-rich.

If Republicans truly cared about deficit reduction, they would be open to increased revenue from the uber-wealthy who have so much money that they are already giving much of it to charity. Lower tax rates from those people does nothing to spur economic growth as analyzed by the Congressional Budget Office and numerous outside policy groups. If Republicans truly cared about deficit reduction they would come up with a plan to spur economic recovery thus leading to increased revenue without higher tax rates, but instead the want to slash spending during a depressed economy. In short, Paul Ryan's plan would devastate the economy in the short-term without running a surplus for three decades and without any long-term benefits that can be backed up by data. If that is leadership, I have some beachfront property in Idaho I'd like to show you. Admittedly, the Republicans have set the leadership bar pretty low, so perhaps in today's Republican Party, the Ryan-Romney plan counts as being bold, but in reality it is nothing but sham economics wrapped up in a shiny new package and masked behind the faux issue of deficit reduction when the real problem is the economic recovery that isn't - again thanks to Republican opposition.

So welcome aboard, Paul Ryan. I am serious when I say I find you to be one of the most palatable Republicans out there, but your plan is still a disaster waiting to happen, and now all of America is going to find out about it.