So yes, Mittens and Paulo are good friends. Friends with benefits? We'll just have to wait and see. Anyway, as the saying goes; just sayin'.
But another saying -- "game recognizes game" -- also explains why the fact that the two get along so well shouldn't be much of a surprise. After all, both are privileged millionaire doppelgangers who -- perhaps due to a head-start in life derived from family inheritances -- realize the cost of everything and the value of nothing. Their relationship depicts the symbiotic bond between two distinct forms of fiscal/financial hucksterism -- Romney's gaming of the private domain via what Texas Governor Rick Perry described as " vulture capitalism " and Ryan's gaming of governmental largesse via a fiscal philosophy classified as " right-wing social engineering " by someone who should know: Newt Gingrich.
What's more, I'd argue that like Romney's thoroughly mythologized "rescue" of the 2002 Olympics, the most flagrant misnomer applied to Ryan is that his deficit-reduction proposals form a personal outline of undaunted political courage, deep philosophical integrity, and iron-clad core values.
This seems to imply that in Ryan's case, political courage -- demonstrated by submitting a budget proposal that rakes the poor and middle class over the coals in order to protect the interests of the one-percent -- is set at a deplorably low standard. Fair enough " I guess. But wouldn't it also stand to reason that an even higher standard of courage would involve running on, not away from that budget proposal -- as Romney is already doing ? But I wouldn't count on Ryan focusing on his budget during the remainder of the campaign any more than Romney -- unless he's trying to help Mitt lose.
The reasons are obvious. Ryan's budget plan makes for a nice way of sucking in the kind of national attention that's useful in a statewide election. But it's dead weight as a means to winning a national election. Certainly, Paul Ryan had figured out from the onset that no economist is required for voters to figure out that his budget is fiscally sound -- but only if some country can be found that's willing to take care of about 47 million American retirees.
So today Ryan -- who one has to believe never dreamed his budget bluster would propel him to vice-presidential consideration -- probably now realizes that it would have been better had he sat tight on the plan rather than re-introduce slightly revised versions in 2011 and early 2012.
In fact, maybe he never should have brought forth such a politically counterintuitive budget plan in the first place. There's little that is smart, courageous or innovative in Ryan's conceptual approach to deficit reduction; he's just the latest new media-hyped "deficit hawk" to put something like it on the table. Ryan's axe-murderer M.O. has been in use since the time when he was barely out of his Underoos (Remember them? "Underwear that's fun to wear). It came about as a consequence of the trickle-down effect of Reagan-era federal tax cuts on localities.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).