Tucson Citizen.com
Fort Buckley - A virtual outpost, from which Don Smith discusses conservatism, politics, and national security matters

Let a Democrat, modern-day economic policy leader explain it to you: Paul Ryan’s budget is “sensible…honest, serious.”

by on Aug. 15, 2012, under Uncategorized

In response to Baja Democrats’ post today on a long-forgotten Republican economics luminary from 30 years ago (David Stockman) writing in two publications that would rather commit seppuku (look it up) than say anything honest about Republicans (Rolling Stone and the New York Times), let me respond with the words of Erskine Bowles. The former Chief of Staff for Bill Clinton, and the Democratic party’s lead on the recent Simpson-Bowles deficit-reduction commission.

Paul Ryan’s budget proposal is “sensible…honest, serious.”

Why is this important? Erskine Bowles has a long pedigree as a Democratic budget thinker — and presidential adviser. When Barack Obama needed to pick the co-chair for his deficit committee, which he roundly ignored in the end, he chose Bowles to represent his side on the panel. Bowles served as Bill Clinton’s chief of staff, and earlier ran the Small Business Administration for Clinton. Ezra Klein predicted on Friday that Bowles would be the front-runner for Tim Geithner’s job at Treasury if Obama wins a second term.

(Emphasis added).

For comparison, the last time David Stockman was in a position of authority in a Republican administration, I was a lieutenant in Germany watching the Soviet Army.

Having read what Erskine Bowles just said about Paul Ryan’s budget proposals, go reread Baja Democrats’ post.

To be clear, Bowles didn’t agree with Ryan’s budget. However, Bowles clearly considers Ryan to be…well, as he said, sensible, honest and serious.

Apparently Bowles and Stockman will have to agree to disagree. The question is, dear reader, who do YOU consider to be a more thoughtful and responsible authority on Paul Ryan’s economic opinions? I’ll go with Erskine Bowles here.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, August 15th, 2012 at 10:23 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

RSS feed for this post (comments)
  • BajaDemocrats

    “When Barack Obama needed to pick the co-chair for his deficit committee, which he roundly ignored in the end”

    - The President didn’t “ignore” the SImpson-Bowles plan, it came up 3 votes short in Congress. Paul Ryan was instrumental in defeating it – he didn’t think it cut Medicare or taxes for the wealthy enough> From Fox News:
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/15/how-obama-missed-his-moment-on-entitlements/
    “Ryan, citing concerns over Medicare and the tax code, walked away from a
    deal that even hawkish senators like Tom Coburn had deemed acceptable.

    • fortbuckley

      David, you’re trying to imply that Democrats warmly supported Simpson-Bowles. Is that what you’re really trying to say? Does the evidence support you?

      • BajaDemocrats

        No, I’m not implying anything. I’m saying that Obama didn’t ignore it, it died in Congress, thanks in large part to Paul Ryan. Obama has been far to willing to compromise with Republicans for the likes of me and other progressives – because we know the Republican idea of “compromise” is to keep moving the goal posts until it’s completely what they want. Obama was willing to enter a “grand bargain” with Boehner to reduce the deficit by over $3 Trillion, and then Boehner moved the goal posts because his caucus wouldn’t accept one penny of new tax revenue to reduce the deficit.

        • fortbuckley

          Republicans resisted agreeing to any new tax revenue, because NO ONE has faith that the Democrats would do anything but waste it. If you slept through the 2010 election, it was a referendum on Democratic spending. My side won, BIG time.

          Are you saying that American voters wanted to reduce the deficit by raising taxes, instead of cutting spending? The speaker’s gavel in John Boehner’s hands tells me the American people wanted to see spending cut, not taxes raised.

          We’ll see what the voters think about the Democratic Party’s stewardship of the economy, and its vision of higher taxes and more government control of the economy, come November.

  • BajaDemocrats

    Breitbart may be gone, but his legacy lives on -
    http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/08/14/3455534/gop-clips-dont-reveal-all-of-bowles.html

    “A video clip of Erskine Bowles, the co-chairman of President Obama’s deficit commission, singing the praises of fellow number cruncher Paul Ryan is making the rounds on the Internet – but it doesn’t accurately represent his entire speech. In fact, the video maker cut out the part of the speech where Bowles calls the Wisconsin congressman’s 2011 plan for Medicare “pretty radical.”

    What’s cut from the video is Bowles’ discussion of making Medicare a
    defined contribution plan, instead of a defined benefit plan. Bowles said. “Our hope was … we wouldn’t have to do something more drastic like
    Paul had recommended,

    Thanks, but I’ll stick with old Stockman, at least his words are in full, written by him, not selected highlights ala Breibart/Shirley Sherrod.

    • fortbuckley

      Medicare is going to need radical changes if it’s going to survive.

      The quote from Bowles you cited says that Democrats hoped they wouldn’t have to do anything as radical as Ryan recommended. Hey, didn’t we ALL “hope” that?

      Unfortunately, the time for “hope,” and for kicking the can down the road, is past. It’s time to make hard choices. Different choices than have been made the past three years. Choices our children and grandchildren will pay for.

      When Erskine Bowles said that Paul Ryan’s plan was “sensible, honest, serious”—you’re saying that he didn’t mean it? Did he not know what those words mean?

      I never said that Bowles agreed with Ryan’s plan, In fact, I said that Bowles DID NOT agree with it. Bowles does, however, consider Ryan to be credible. You used Stockman, again a Cold War relic, to try and say that Ryan isn’t.

      David, of COURSE you’ll stick with David Stockman, and Rolling Stone, and the New York Times. That doesn’t surprise me in the least.

  • BajaDemocrats

    Also, Erskine Bowles’ opinion on Romneys tax/budget plan:
    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/08/erskine-bowles-mitt-romney-raise-taxes-middle-class.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

    “The commission’s co-chair, Erskine Bowles, has repeatedly said it’s not mathematically possible to meet Romney’s goals without asking the middle class to pay more in taxes.”

    “The Romney plan, by sticking to revenue-neutrality and leaving in place tax breaks, would raise taxes on the middle class and do nothing to shrink the deficit,” Bowles wrote in a Washington Post op-ed last week.

  • Fraser007

    I am glad that you have resumed your blog site. Between the BalaDemocrats, Hispanic Politico (Open Borders pro Illegal alien blog site) there are few if any Conservative bloggers.
    Keep hitting them hard. We will support as we can.

    • fortbuckley

      I’m waiting for an Erskine Bowles hostage video, similar to the one that Newark Mayor Cory Booker was, um, “convinced” to air, after he criticized Obama ads that demonized Bain Capital.

      The Bowles ad would look something like this: In the foreground, a bruised Erskine Bowles would explain that he didn’t actually say what he have him on tape saying. In the background, SEIU members are seen holding the hands of Bowles’ grandchildren.

      Something like that…

«
»