Paul Ryan is either a chameleon, a flip-flopper or a liar.

OpinionPaul Ryan's Skeleton in the Closet
NEW YORK (TheStreet) -- Paul Ryan is either a chameleon, a flip-flopper or a liar. There is no third alternative. I vote "liar."
I'm really staggered by the media's softball handling of what is going to become known in the waning months of this campaign as Mitt Romney's Ayn Rand Problem.
For years, his newly minted running mate has championed Rand, a Russian-born author chiefly known for her novels Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead. In those books and in essays, speeches and interviews, Rand celebrated greed and selfishness, rejected Judeo-Christian morality, and set forth an alien vision of a nearly government-free America that would be ruled by its industrialists and bankers -- an untaxed super-rich elite. She was a strident atheist.
Then, in April, Ryan had an apparent change of heart. He gave an interview to the National Review in which he disavowed Rand entirely. Ryan said that, yes, like a lot of people he'd read Rand as a youth, but he certainly was not an adherent to her philosophy.
"I, like millions of young people in America, read Rand's novels when I was young. I enjoyed them," Ryan told the National Review. That got him interested in the Chicago School of economics and in Milton Friedman. "But it's a big stretch to suggest that a person is therefore an Objectivist."
The National Review went on thusly: " 'I reject her philosophy,' Ryan says firmly. 'It's an atheist philosophy. It reduces human interactions down to mere contracts and it is antithetical to my worldview. If somebody is going to try to paste a person's view on epistemology to me, then give me Thomas Aquinas,' who believed that man needs divine help in the pursuit of knowledge. 'Don't give me Ayn Rand.' "
There's nothing more unsavory than smearing somebody because of views he held years ago. I remember how teed-off my parents were back in the 1960s, when the Democratic boss of the Bronx, Congressman Charles Buckley, smeared his Reform Democrat challenger Jonathan Bingham as an anti-Semite because he was a youthful member of the isolationist America First Committee. Yes, he was, but that was years ago and his views had changed. Buckley was voted out and Bingham became the congressmen in a largely Jewish district.
http://www.thestreet.com/story/11661708/1/paul-ryans-skeleton-in-the-closet.html?CM_VEN=AD|TWR|JC

 

To be fair, why can't he just be a guy who, with maturity, has moderated his Randroidian views?

 

he is only saying that now because he recently found out she was an atheist.

 

Not sure where you're going with this, politics, or religion? : )

The main thing I see is his economic plan, decidedly Randian, and not popular with religious leaders.

 

Look at the substance of his policy platform and his demonstrated absolute unwillingness to bend. Where's the moderation? He's perfectly willing to work with the "other side" provided they do things exactly his way. I still sense Randroid rage.

 

And suddenly Obama is FOR gay marriage right around election time even though he made it VERY clear he did not support it in 2008 because of his "religion". Pot meet Kettle.

 

Here, let's try something. Vhehn, can you name one other politician in Washington other then Ron Paul that doesn't flip flop? Just pick one. And again, not Ron Paul. Someone else. LOL. Just one. Take your time. And you can use Google if you have to.

 

Hardly a parallel. I don't even see the point you're trying to make. Do you? Obama respects human rights and this was the latest in a natural progression on the matter following the repeal of DADT, whereas Ryan's economic policy platform has not moved an iota, except maybe he's trying to soften the language.

There is no pot. There is no kettle. There is no introduction.

 

Huh? Why is it whenever a liberal does a 180 you call it a progression? LOL. Come on Brass. Even you know that is BS. He made it very clear in 2008 (he was asked several times), that this is a deep life long belief he had and was based on his religious values. Now suddenly at "election" time, he has what you call a "progression"?

I would respect you a lot more Brass if just once and awhile you came out and stood for something and criticized your own side and said, you know what, my guy is wrong about that. But you never do. It's always all so clear for you the right/left paradigm. Let me ask you something, when are YOU going to progress?

 

Agreed they all lie, flip flop and change their mind, make promises they know they can't keep, it's part of the game. And it's part of being human.