We are not going to give up on destroying the healthcare system for the American people.
-Paul Ryan, slipping up while announcing his new budget plan. Ryan meant to attack Obama’s Affordable Care Act, which he proposes repealing.
HILARIOUS!
(via trebaolofarabia)
Oh my god it’s not the Onion.
(via jadelyn)
Never not reblogging.
(via shickalenia)
Paul Ryan tells the truth! Imagine that.
These are the people you’re electing into office. I understand Romney is a bit of a joke but shit like this is serious when they’re 100% intent on stripping people of privileges they barely got to have.
PLEASE, PLEASE GO VOTE IN TWO WEEKS IF YOU ARE OVER 18 AND LIVE IN AMERICA.
PLEASE. There is really no excuse not to. :/
Paul Ryan: "Now it's a war on women tomorrow it's going to be a war on left-handed Irishmen" →
“Paul Ryan at his Naples fundraiser: “Now it’s a war on women tomorrow it’s going to be a war on left-handed Irishmen or something like that””
Mitt Romney brought their “war on women” into the general population’s consciousness earlier this week after his comments during the presidential debate at Hofstra University this Tuesday.
Read more: http://www.irishcentral.com/news/Paul-Ryan-condemns-idea-of-GOPs-war-on-women-suggesting-next-will-be-war-on-left-handed-Irishmen-174992951.html#ixzz29sK8t1Yk
Why are Republicans so awful??
Paul Ryan mansplains "binders full of women." →
Because BALLS.
Ryan mansplains it all.
Ryan can mansplain all he wants. The real problem for me wasn’t so much the ridiculous “BINDERS OF WOMEN” thing, it was when Romney said that women needed flexible hours so that they could get home in time to make dinner, and that single parents caused violent crimes.
Ryan is correct that poverty hits women hard. Yet Romney and Ryan were both against the Lilly Ledbetter act, both against the Violence Against Women act, and both against Planned Parenthood, which provides health care for many low income women.
When is his dumb ass going to address all of that? This “Let me explain the BINDERS OF WOMEN” thing is a straw man. It’s not the real issue.
I sincerely hope that after this election, Mitt Romney disappears into obscurity and takes his creepy Paul Ryan thing with him.
Paul Ryan’s Soup Kitchen Photo Op
According to The Washington Post:
Brian J. Antal, president of the Mahoning County St. Vincent De Paul Society, said that he was not contacted by the Romney campaign ahead of the Saturday morning visit by Ryan, who stopped by the soup kitchen after a town hall at Youngstown State University.
“We’re a faith-based organization; we are apolitical because the majority of our funding is from private donations,” Antal said in a phone interview Monday afternoon. “It’s strictly in our bylaws not to do it. They showed up there, and they did not have permission. They got one of the volunteers to open up the doors.”
He added: “The photo-op they did wasn’t even accurate. He did nothing. He just came in here to get his picture taken at the dining hall.”
Hahahaha oh my GOD
Source: 
REPUBLICANS AREN'T RACIST except when they are →
Here’s an article with Romney denouncing a racist pro-Romney message, and insisting “THIS DOESN’T MEAN HIS SUPPORTERS ARE RACIST THOUGH!”
And the comments from Republicans that follow the article? Pretty much all racist! WOW, SHOCK.
HIDDEN_LION
Posted on October 13, 2012 at 5:30pm
Could of had the “don’t Re-nig” message on it. If the Blacks and mexicans are allowed to be racist, it is only fair white are given the same privilege
IAMPRAYING4U
Posted on October 13, 2012 at 5:33pm
Some people cant take a joke
HKS
Posted on October 13, 2012 at 6:08pm
Ok for blacks not so for whites, is this a great country or what.
13TH IMAM
Posted on October 13, 2012 at 5:05pm
Since 90% of blacks vote for the “Black guy” because he’s black, why don’t 90% of whites vote for the“ White guy” because he’s white?
Now I don’t like or dislike a person because of his melanin count, but do dislike one because of his political stance. I find that for the most part, DEMOCRAT’s are the most racist people i know.
OLEFROMMN
Posted on October 13, 2012 at 5:20pm
The guy exercised his First Amendment rights as did the Romney campaign. Nothing more/nothing less.
PUCCI
Posted on October 13, 2012 at 7:45pmThis a plant- everybody knows that all the racist come from the left. It just fits the narrative that a Republican would do such a thing.
SWAMPY
Posted on October 13, 2012 at 10:18pm
Ignorant is to deny the truth, and call others names who don’t. There was nothing in the Bell Curve that was wrong, except they miscalculated the average black iq, it is really closer to 79 not 85. Until the world is willing to admit the problem, and start working on ways to actually solve the problem, rather than penalizing others for being smarter, it’s only going to get worse and worse. One of the few things Darwin really nailed as blacks infested one of the most fertile regions on the planet and never learned to plant crops, never learned to tan leather, never learned to raise livestock, never learned a written language, until the white man came and showed them not came in and held them back.
SILLYFRESHNESS
Posted on October 14, 2012 at 12:53amDon‘t tell me the black community doesn’t say the same thing, only they call it the black house. There is more rampant racism in the black community than white community. Blacks don’t hide it either. They are proud of their hatred.
And on and on and on and ON.
And of course, countless posts saying, “That guy HAS TO be a plant! We’re not racist like that! See how not racist we are? We’d never say racist things, so this is obviously a set-up by the Obama campaign.”
Oh yeah, I see how non-racist you all are. Thanks for showing me! Because that T shirt definitely doesn’t exist, and I surely haven’t seen that certain bumper sticker mentioned up there around town or anything. Nope, no actual Republican would think such a thing! And they definitely wouldn’t make literally hundreds of racist comments in response to this.
AT ALL.
(Not to mention the godawful spelling, grammar and punctuation all over those comments. Which continues to prove to me how actually stupid these people are, as well as being ignorant and racist. Well done, Repugnant-cans!)
Biden’s laugh is utterly brutal because it takes Paul Ryan, the marathon-exaggerating, dumbbell-curling, wannabe manly man and does the absolute worst thing imaginable to a guy like that. It points at him and makes him a fool. It says, “Yeah, tell me another one, Backwards Baseball Cap.” It’s at once furious and dismissive. It understands that at the heart of humor there’s a howl of pain. That why it’s the favorite weapon of choice of the trod-upon. And it says to the American voters the most undermining thing imaginable: “You see this fella next to me? What a goddamn joke.
Mary Elizabeth Williams at Salon
Who knows if that’s how the undecideds (ew) will see it. But I agree that the laughter was definitely a thought out strategy for the most part.
(via bricksandmortarandchewinggum)
From what they’ve been saying on the news, the undecideds thought that Biden won the debate in the polls. So it worked.
(via yoyomar)
Uh, Guys? GO VOTE
http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/10/11/who-won-vice-presidential-debate-vote-poll-biden-ryan/
TUMBLR BOMB THIS SHIT.
TUMBLR BOMB FAUX NEWS
Reason and Science
During last night’s debate, Paul Ryan discussed his position on religion and abortion. He claimed that he came by his pro-life policy position because of “reason and science,” and that his religious faith instructs that “life begins at conception.”
Daniel Holter, who blogs at the excellent Apoplectic Skeptic, was … well … apoplectic:
The phrases “I’m pro-life because of reason and science” and “I believe life begins at conception” are totally incompatible, 100% diametrically opposed.
In this, Holter is incorrect. Human life does begin at conception. The zygote is a new, unique organism.
But this doesn’t tell us anything at all about abortion. And in framing the debate in this way, Ryan is able to wrap his opposition to abortion, which is religious, in the thinnest veneer of science … which I suspect is what Holter was getting at and where he and I ultimately agree.
The follow-up question for Paul Ryan ought to have been why human life, at this incredibly early stage of development, is so desperately important … by which I mean that he is willing to limit the choices of a rights-bearing person, the woman carrying the zygote, in order to protect that life. His answer, I presume, is either that the zygote is a person (which means that it possesses a right to life) or that it is on its way to becoming one.
This requires, of course, a definition of personhood; my own revolves around the fairly scientific (and measurable) concept of organized cortical brain activity, which means that zygotes are not rights-bearing agents. I think I’m on pretty solid ground in arguing that, whatever definition you choose, it’s pretty obvious that the zygote is not a person. Unless you choose the religious argument, which might make a claim about ensoulment. But Ryan, now an avowed man of science, can’t choose that one.
That means he’ll likely go with an argument about prospective personhood. The zygote isn’t a person at the moment of conception, but it is clearly a human life … and it will become a rights-bearing person at some later moment during fetal development so it must be cared for and not destroyed.
The trouble for Ryan, then, comes from at least three directions:
- Ryan must explain why an organism that isn’t currently a rights-bearing person has a claim that the government should recognize. Further, he must explain why the organism’s future rights should be weighed more heavily than those of a person, the woman carrying the zygote, whose rights are not at all in doubt.
- Ryan must give some indication of the point during fetal development when personhood — and thus rights — are attained. And he must then explain why abortions cannot permitted up to this moment. In other words, he must be clear about why prospective personhood matters enough to warrant the infringement on the rights of a person, the woman carrying the zygote.
- The policy position of the Romney/Ryan campaign now allows for abortion in cases of rape, incest, or the health of the mother. But if the zygote is on its way to becoming a rights-bearing person, then Ryan encounters a serious difficulty for his explanation of (2), insofar as it now seems that some prospective persons can be destroyed while others must be protected. Ryan’s prior policy of opposing abortion without exception seems terribly callous, but it’s consistent (especially with his religious belief but also more generally).
The easy way to solve these problems is to be honest. He could say, I’m a religious man and, as such, I believe that each human being has a soul from the moment of conception. Or he could say, I’m a religious man but I don’t believe that the government ought to foist my religious beliefs on others. The trouble with the former is that it can’t be demonstrated and it doesn’t win public policy debates; the trouble with the latter is that it’s what Joe Biden said.
HEY GUYS I’M A WHITE UPPER CLASS MALE AND I WAS REALLY EXCITED ABOUT MY PLANNED PREGNANCY 10 YEARS AGO SO FUCK YOU IF YOU DON’T GIVE YOUR ULTRASOUND A CUTE NICKNAME AND SERVE AS AN INCUBATOR FOR MY PREHISTORIC BELIEFS
“LETTING WOMEN CONTROL THEIR BODIES INFRINGES ON MY RELIGIOUS FREEDOM!!11111”
Paul Ryan more or less
Tonight the man who wrote the Violence Against Women Act debates the man who voted against even considering it.
What everyone needs to know for the VP debate
Head into the debate prepared — check out more important facts on Paul Ryan.
- Romney and Ryan would eliminate health care for 31 million people who are poor or disabled.
- Ryan voted for future defense cuts he now blames on Obama.
- Ryan wants to kick 1 million students off of Pell Grants.
- Ryan supports a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage.
- Ryan voted to increase the debt ceiling by $4 trillion under Bush.
- Ryan supported economic stimulus under Bush.
- Ryan used to supports a key aspect of Obamacare.
- Ryan opposes abortion access for rape victims
Page 1 of 3
