Networks Falsely Slam Ryan as Spending Cutter Who Could ‘Destroy’ Medicare

NewsBusters.org ^ | August 11, 2012 | Rich Noyes

[Kaslin]

Previewing the choice of Paul Ryan as the GOP vice presidential candidate, the ABC, CBS and NBC morning shows all used Democratic framing to describe the House GOP budget plan that Ryan championed as a plan to, as CBS’s Bob Schieffer put it, “cut more than $5 trillion over the next ten years.” ABC’s Bianna Golodryga passed along the demagogic rhetoric of liberals: “Democrats, meantime, contest that it will destroy Medicare and Social Security.”

But Ryan’s plan would actually increase federal spending over the next ten years, from about $3.6 trillion this year to just under $4.9 trillion in 2022. The $5 trillion in “cuts” are merely reductions from the much-higher spending anticipated by President Obama’s budget. (See tables starting on page 88.)

While Ryan’s approach — assuming it passed and future Congresses continued to abide by its limits —  would slow the growth in federal spending so it would amount to just under 20% of the overall economy, it also forecasts uninterrupted budget deficits (and, therefore, a rising national debt) through 2022. Yet not one of the morning shows today carried any suggestion that Ryan should be criticized for taking too mild an approach to the fiscal crisis.

Instead, the networks all included some variation of the Democratic charge that Ryan’s plan would include, as ABC’s Golodryga claimed, “sharp cuts in federal spending.” CBS and NBC even cited Newt Gingrich as an authority, recalling his quickly-retracted “right-wing social engineering” slam from early last year.

NBC’s Chuck Todd argued that Democrats have “successfully” used Ryan’s plan as a campaign tactic “in some congressional races, we are seeing it get some traction, basically running against the idea of what Ryan wants to do to Medicare. Help Democrats in Senate races in some red states.”

Of course, the Democrats owe much of their success in demonizing the Ryan plan to the so-called “news” media, which mis-portrays it as deeply cutting spending, as opposed to mildly slowing the growth of spending.

Key quotes from the August 11 morning shows, all of which aired a couple of hours before Mitt Romney made the official announcement of Ryan’s selection:
 

# ABC’s Good Morning America:

BIANNA GOLODRYGA: A bold choice, but not one without risks. Paul Ryan is 42-years-old. He’s been elected to the House from his district in Wisconsin seven times, but he’s now best-known for his controversial budget proposal, which some within his own party has distanced themselves from. He’s pushing for sharp cuts in federal spending, including programs like Medicare. Now, his proposal is set to be a focal point of this election. Will Republicans be forced to fully embrace it now? Democrats, meantime, contest that it will destroy Medicare and Social Security.

# CBS This Morning

BOB SCHIEFFER: I think conservatives are going to be delighted. They’re going to say that Mitt Romney finally did something bold. This is what the Wall Street Journal was urging, this is what the Weekly Standard, Bill Kristol, a strong voice of conservatism -- both were saying this week this is the guy.

But I tell you the other part, Rebecca, is I think Democrats are going to be delighted as well. Because Paul Ryan’s budget, it’s right there in black and white. The numbers are there. He wants to cut more than $5 trillion over the next ten years. But where he cuts is where Democrats are going to try to make it an issue. He wants to cut spending from Medicaid. He wants to cut spending for Food Stamps, for student loans. All of these social programs. He also wants to change Medicare. He wants to have seniors buy insurance, and they will get a government subsidy to help them do that.

So this campaign has now been joined. It’s been really about silly stuff up until now quite frankly in my view. Now it’s going to be about something, about what do we want to do with these social programs- and government spending. Where do we want to make these cuts.

You know, back there early on, I remember in the Republican campaign, Newt Gingrich actually said, well, he branded Paul Ryan’s budget ‘right-wing social engineering.’ And he said, you know, that’s no more welcome than left-wing social engineering. So, we’ll see where he comes down on it now.

# NBC’s Today:

DAVID GREGORY: He’s part of a conservative wave in the House of Representatives who put his own name to the House budget blueprint which was pretty controversial. It didn’t pass. It talked about cutting spending and also changing the Medicare program for seniors, introducing the voucher program. Made it very controversial from the start. Even among some fellow Republicans. Newt Gingrich notably called it right wing social engineering. But conservatives have rallied around Paul Ryan. He talks in big, bold strokes about the fiscal crisis, the debt crisis, and he’s going to be a powerful voice for Mitt Romney on dealing with both the economy and the fiscal crisis that the country faces, but there are downsides as well.

LESTER HOLT: And Chuck, before I turn to you, we’ve just learned that the app that the campaign has put together has formally confirmed the pick of Paul Ryan as the VP candidate. But, Chuck, let me ask you -- the notion that this now turns the conversation toward deficit cutting, towards the budget, does it cut both ways for Republicans here? Does it open them up for more criticism on that side?

CHUCK TODD: Well, it could. I mean, it’s gonna put this issue of Medicare, the future of Medicare, the future of Social Security, but Medicare in particular, that’s the centerpiece of Paul Ryan’s budget reform plan that he put out both last year and this year. Democrats politically have been able to successfully use this in some congressional races, we are seeing it get some traction, basically running against the idea of what Ryan wants to do to Medicare. Help Democrats in Senate races in some red states. So this has a lot of downside as well.

[manc]

yes but if Romney and the GOP act like they have bene and in 2008 then we’ll let the media cover for their messiah whilst attacking with lies.

[RetSignman]

[Where did you find that?]

Find what...I can’t find it lol

[Alas Babylon!]

Amen!

[Varsity Flight]

“, it also forecasts uninterrupted budget deficits (and, therefore, a rising national debt) through 2022. Yet not one of the morning shows today carried any suggestion that Ryan should be criticized for taking too mild an approach to the fiscal crisis...”

The Takers continue. Set-up.

[Varsity Flight]

Flack. Did these two government selected, stand-up today, and declare to sign a waiver exempting everyone out of Extortion-Care, immediately after taking office, until it’s abolished totally?

If not, all flack, and less freedom. Insider cronyism.

[maine-iac7]

so - obama care is not a tax - and the 500 BILLION obama care takes out of Medicare is not a ‘cut”

Have I got that right?

[clee1]

I think politically his pick will hurt Romney quite a bit.

I think you are a putz.

[1035rep]

LOL, the Kenyan is going to get slaughtered but at least you’ll have your dreams.

[1035rep]

Mostly the newbies :)

[WOSG]

- ignore emotional posters. they cant think straight.
- ignore doom-and-gloomers. nothing is ever good enough for eye-ores.
- Ryan is smart, articulate and conservatives.
gosh, if we had that in a president, we’d be thrilled. This is a great pick.
- I dont disagree that Ryan’s budget is a target, but ...
- VP’s rarely change election races much. Its hogwash to say any state is won or lost on this pick. But it WILL help Romney, if only to shore up conservative support - which he NEEDS - and to make this a BIG ISSUE election.
-Romney will win FL, VA and OH... JMHO, but Obama’s shot his wad by demonizing Romney and went too far, yet the polls are tied. If and when Romney/Ryan hammer home the connection between Obama and our failed economy, the’ll pick up the undecideds.

[lentulusgracchus]

It will force Obama to run on the foremost issue on which his record can be judged, and on which he fails miserably.

Sorry, but nothing will ever force the MSM to do or say anything that would disadvantage their boy.

The Chicago Boys will go right on demagoguing, as they have done with the "shove Granny off the cliff" ad, using black-propaganda techniques. The press callout on the scummy "Romney killed my wife" ad was an outlier.

If the Democrats refuse to respond to Romney with substantive arguments but continue to use lies and statistical lies to smear the GOP ticket, the MSM will cover for them. They always do. The Dems will have 360-degree tactical flexibility and air cover.

[lentulusgracchus]

I do think this pick turns the election sharply Obama’s favor.

That remains to be seen, but I rather suspect you're right. The Republicans will not be allowed by MSM to run any sort of campaign such as they had envisioned. The MSM will make sure the "rules" always favor the Democrats, and they will give the 'Rat memes favorable treatment and free propagation.

[lentulusgracchus]

If and when Romney/Ryan hammer home the connection between Obama and our failed economy, the’ll pick up the undecideds.

Hope you're right, but nobody can "force" the 'Rats, with the MSM in their corner, to stand and fight on losing issues (everything). They've already signaled that they intend to smear and blackguard their way into a second term. They did that when Axelrod sent those whores out to attack Herman Cain.

[Jim Noble]

Well, at least the election will be ABOUT something, and something important, at that.

The reason we are where we are is that the People, through their representatives in Congress assembled, are fine with high levels of spending as long as they can borrow the money to pay for it.

Medicare, beloved by many (including many here) is going to be destroyed, no matter what. It is going to be destroyed because its funding is finite while its demand is infinite, by design.

This is the principal reason three successive elected Congresses cannot pass a budget. The model (borrow to spend) is collapsing.

Paul Ryan is the only guy with the balls to describe a way out. This makes him an excellent choice, IF the People who elected all these Congresses want a way out.

THAT, unfortunately, is very much in doubt.

Romney has drawn a line in the sand with this pick. With regard to the economy, at least, no more lies.

Are the People up to it? I doubt it.

Vote for Romney, but bet on Obama.

[lentulusgracchus]

Well, at least the election will be ABOUT something, and something important, at that.

If it is, "Choom" and his dogs will be crushed harder than anyone has ever been crushed in the history of the American Republic. It will be annihilation -- and I'll demand FBI investigations and charges against Regime operatives.

But see my last. That is a very tall order with the likes of David Gregory, Gloria Borger, and Terry Moran asking all the questions.

[Jim Noble]

I did read your last, and I don’t agree that paying for free sh*t with borrowed money is, necessarily, a “losing” issue.

The People don’t like it, in principle. But they sure aren’t willing to pay for all that free sh*t (Medicare first and foremost), and I think they won’t give it up either.

If I’m right, Obama is in like Flynn.

[lentulusgracchus]

The People don’t like it, in principle. But they sure aren’t willing to pay for all that free sh*t (Medicare first and foremost), and I think they won’t give it up either.

Well, the People are divided right about down the middle, so I've proposed a few times -- to JimRob just today -- that we need to peel off New England and NYC to get rid of enough of the tax-eaters that we can take matters in hand and give ourselves a good cleanout of the citizen body. Not by classifying citizenship or initiating a Spartiate republic such as Robert Heinlein once dreamed of (Starship Troopers), but by basically giving the people who don't want to work and want to game the system, or have shown their hand by gaming the system in the past, one-way boat tickets to someplace else.

Or loading a bunch of them up on a fleet of converted supertankers, grounding the transports on West African beaches, and giving the exiles all the guns and ammo they need to reestablish themselves on the very people who once sold their asses into slavery.

Something like that.

Lincoln wanted to send them to Panama to dig the Canal -- and before Walter Reed. How 'bout that? He wasn't sentimental about much of anything -- Myers-Briggs personality sorting calls Lincoln a "Rational", meaning the kind of guy who'll settle your hash for a ducat.

[nascarnation]

If I’m right, Obama is in like Flynn.

If that's true, we'll have to spend 2013 on FR deciding whether to bolt or revolt....