Home | About | Donate

The Paradox of Paul Ryan: Why the Tea Party’s Right to be Wary


The Paradox of Paul Ryan: Why the Tea Party’s Right to be Wary

Bill Moyers, Michael Winship

Only in a world where Cosmopolitan magazine can declare the Kardashians “America’s First Family” and the multi-billionaire loose cannon Donald Trump is perceived by millions as the potential steward of our nuclear arsenal could about-to-be Speaker of the House Paul Ryan be savaged as insufficiently right-wing.


It's understood in holistic health circles that sugar facilitates the spread of Cancer.

All of the money (sugar) pouring into Washington via lobbying firms is growing the Cancer of a government that is, as Catherine Austin Fitts put it--a subsidiary of the corporate world.

A few million dollars or even hundreds of millions of dollars purchase many billions in special treatment, policies, and programs. From the standpoint of investor-parasites, profitable odds are nothing short of amazing!

Until the sugar is taken out of the political equation, bacteria will thrive and the organism (a govt. of "WE, the People") will continue to rot and/or succumb to Cancer. Paul Ryan = DEATH of what's left of this Democracy.


"Why the Tea Party’s Right to be Wary"

Do they mean: "Why the Tea Party is Right to be Wary"? With the reception of "it's for "it is" I've never heard of a " 's" replacing the third-person present from of the verb "to be".

And I pick on the grammar because the rest of this article is just so much pin-head angel-counting - who the hell cares what the motives of this or that faction of the extreme US right are?


Having the utmost respect for Bill Moyers, the following is not meant to be crass, but rather constructive criticism. I would have worded the headline along the lines of "Why everyone is right to be wary." Paul Ryan is obviously a "chosen one" who has support from the Deep State. I won't pretend to know the whole narrative, but am sure it runs very deep. Although I've never registered for a political party, I hope the D's retake the House just to unseat this insidious plant.


I feel certain that you wrote this in a momentary lapse of reason, for that would mean an unfamiliarity with such staples of the English language as:
That's too bad.
John's not coming.
She's never here on time.
Where's the beer?
And the infamous:
Who's on third?


"And the infamous: Who's on third?"

Who's on first! I Don't Know's on third.


"The Tea Party's right to be wary" is awkward. This phrase is going to be understood by most readers to mean that The Tea Party has a right to be wary." Not "The Tea party is correct in being wary" Note that in all your examples the contraction " 's" for "to be" is used right before an adverb or prepositional phrase - never a word that can possibly be a noun.

And no, I guess becasue I seem to spend my time writing engineering reports I don't actually use informal expression like your examples in writing unless I'm quoting spoken English.

And as I already wrote, the English composition lessons are the only thing of any worth in this lousy article by a couple old democrat liberals trying to be "open minded" about the both the vile "Tea Party", and the equally vile Ryan.


Paul Ryan claims that, inwardly, he "somehow manages" to harmoniously combine the absolutist ethics of Ayn Rand's Objectivist value system with the absolutist metaphysics.of Trinitarian Christian theology.
But since neither of these authoritarian "systems" are rooted in demonstrable human truths (quite the opposite, really), what does Ryan hope to gain by combining them: Some kind of magical Hegelian synthesis that "somehow manages" to validate both?
What I see in Ryan, is a mindlessly confused coward whose childishly strutting ego needs to spout a rottenly selfish philosophy, but whose smidgen of doubting conscience needs to cover its ass, too, by pretending that some alleged Christian God approves of his solipsistic ideas, or at least will forgive him if he's wrong.
Ryan is not a paradox. He's simply a pathology.



He's the pathology that gets rewarded with power. There will be more like him, and likely even worst, as we march to our demise. Either we get used to it, and end up all slaves, or prepare for the revolution.




Ayn Rand, his hero, was an atheist. I suspect he is as well (so am I) but all his proselytizing for jesus is smoke and mirrors for his "I've got mine..screw you" mind set. He knows atheists can't get elected to dog-catcher let alone any other public office. He certainly is a sick puppy.


The last sentence is good line for Bernie against Hilliary.

More dysfunction in Congress and another decade of not doing the business of the people only the billionaires.

Bernie what was the saying you can't go to a gunfight with a knife or slingshot or whatever it was. It is really hard when billionaire class has bought out every level of government and taxpayers airwaves (media).


And it would appear there are many "sick puppies" since he keeps getting elected -- it's as if this entire country has been invaded by the bodysnatchers!