Jon Stewart nails Paul Ryan to a pile of his own BS.

January 25, 2013 By 5 Comments

Can you say “hoist on his own petard”?

Filed Under: Politics 5 Comments
  • ottod

    Not that I don’t agree with your sentiment, but isn’t that kind of like nailing pudding to jello?

  • baal

    heh, I suspect the hard part for John on that piece was keeping his complaint small. There was more than enough support to make a bigger attack on Paul Ryan but by keeping so closely to the evidence and letting Ryan’s words (lying sack of crap) speak for themselves, John comes off as masterful in the skewer.

    This bit is also further evidence (more confirmation bias for me?) that the faux news fake 2nd reality bubble is having a RL impact. The Makers/Takers originally floated up as part of a FN graphic and became folded into right wing talking points. The distinction always was one of wealth. The folks holding money (wealthy) were defined as makers.
    This is obviously at odds with reality. I could sit on a throne of gold watching movies and never lift a finger and still be called a maker by the FN definition. Working 3 part time jobs while having no health care and never getting time with your kids? That’s the taker.
    Left wing think tanks should look for other right wing mis-defintions and use them to hoist opponents.

    • Glodson

      It goes to show that we can just quote what people like Ryan say in the proper context and let that stand as an argument against their point.

  • UsingReason

    When Jon gets a bit angry and carefully tears someone apart it’s pretty much one of the most entertaining things you can watch. It seems to be taking more and more to get him rikled up over the years but Paul Ryan definitely set him off.

  • iknklast

    This is just such a good example of the disconnect so many of these folks have from reality. Getting food stamps? Oooohhh, you’re sitting on your ass. I got food stamps while working 3 jobs, pursuing a masters, and raising a teenage son on my own. Nice to spend so much time in the hammock – hell, I didn’t even own a hammock. Couldn’t afford one.

    And the idea of lifelong dependency? Haven’t they got the memo? You can only get welfare for 5 years now – total lifetime benefit. So, if you are 5 years old, and you were born just as your parents first went on welfare, you are the victim of a lifetime welfare dependency. You slacker! Quit eating that peanut butter sandwich, get off your lazy butt, and go to work! What? You’re trying to get through kindergarten? NO EXCUSE!

    Food stamps, fortunately, do not have the same lifetime maximum, so the working poor are able to supplement their meager income with just enough to put “food on their famil;y” – if they are lucky enough to have a cheap grocery in town. And that meagre income they are receiving is responsible, in part, for the low prices we all enjoy on products. If we were willing to pay a few cents more for some items, perhaps the people who were making them would be able to live a decent life, as well. But the minute a price increase occurs, it’s blamed on greed and sloth. I would maintain that the only greed involved is that of a corporation that has gotten used to making profits that go way beyond obscene (hyperimprobability drive style profits) that they see it as taking money out of their pockets if they make a decent profit instead. And Paul Ryan thinks this way right along with them, which is why he’s so eager to bust the only unions that have any strength at all (which isn’t much strength, but hey, teachers unions? Wow. Those teachers get…oh, I don’t know, it must be huge salaries, because they have a union, right? And they’re lazy). If you aren’t sure, this was snark. I am a teacher. I know better. And my guess is Paul Ryan does, too. He banked on the ordinary voter not knowing better.