Paul Ryan Votes Against Supporting our Troops, Misinformed on District Opinion of Public Option.

Congressman Paul Ryan is on the wrong page again with his district and country. Let's start with health care reform.

According to Wispolitics.com:

"Ryan also said his 1st CD constituents are largely supportive of the position he has taken in opposition to the health care reform agenda being pushed by Dems."

BUT: Nate Silver of Five Thirty Eight pointed out Research 2000's survey results in Rep. Paul Ryan's 1st district and found it supported the public option by 47% vs. 42% opposed.

And when it comes to a Republican alternative: Ryan: “But the point is there’s lots of alternatives that are out there, lots of Republicans have proposed them.”

That's funny, not one of those proposals have had enough flesh in it to get a CBO estimate. But that might not be the final word. Republicans did submit a plan to the CBO last week, with absolutely no cost containment in it. We'll see how well the fiscal conservatives are with their free market model.

And get this, Ryan admits we have rationing now. LA Times: "

At least one conservative Republican, Rep. Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, acknowledges what this debate is really about. "Rationing occurs now," he said recently. "The question is: Who does it? Is it the government, or is it the patient [and] the doctor along with their insurance?"

Rep. Paul Ryan joined 146 other Taliban sympathizers when they voted against the 2010 military budget. Instead of trying to bring our troops home alive and prevent another 9/11 from happening again, Ryan voted against the interests of our troops so he could opposed the inclusion of hate crime legislation based on gender, sexual orientation and disability.

You would think such enhancers would be welcome by the party known for being tough on crime and who have acted like drunk sailors when it came to spending taxpayer dollars on building more prisons.

Protecting criminals and voting against supporting the troops will not look good in the upcoming elections.

Note; The military funding commentary I wrote here utilized the same talking points and style perfected by the Republicans Party, just in case you thought I was going "Beck" (off the deep end).