Sooooo, basically he's trying to wriggle out from under this by claiming one of his constituents submitted a request for $20 m in Stimulus Funding, and he - what? - just passed it along to whomever was responsible for doling out the cash?

Not only weak, but lame - so much (again) for the "party of personal responsibility"...

"I forgot I did what I said I didn't do."

This is where Biden should go back on the attack. This deserves a pounding!

NEWSFLASH: Republicans are lying pieces of shit.

You can't criticize the President's opponents for being two-faced, when the President is regularly so. I mean, you can, but not if you want to be taken seriously.

Criticize the President's opponents for their policy differences. Domestic policies, of course, since their foreign policies are too similar. Besides the war on drugs and criminal justice and state secrets and corporatism and support for Wall St. and big banks, there are plenty of issues on which they differ. Well, a few, anyway.

@7
"You can't criticize the President's opponents for being two-faced, when the President is regularly so."

Sure you can.
Particularly if you also apply that same standard to the President.

"Criticize the President's opponents for their policy differences."

Okay.
What are Romney's policy specifics for Medicare/Medicaid?
Oh, you don't know because he refuses to discuss specifics because he doesn't want to give any "ammunition" to Obama's team.

So that kind of negates your "concern trolling" and "tone trolling".

if your constituent's requests for stimulus funds go against your public position against the stimulus, you should tell your constituents no. it may not make them happy, it may result in losing you re-election, but you should stick to your principles, paul ryan. you intellectual titan.

@8 Particularly if you also apply that same standard to the President.

Well, that's the point, isn't it? Paul never applies the same standard to the President. Unless you can find some posts in which Paul criticizes the President for his dishonesty or conservative policies, in which case, I'll happily concede the point.

Oh, you don't know because he refuses to discuss specifics because he doesn't want to give any "ammunition" to Obama's team.

Well, this is kind of silly. We do know Ryan's plans for medicare. It seems perfectly reasonable to criticize him, as he's been, for that. His opinion of medicare is different from the President's. His being two-faced is not different.

So, I was merely saying that Paul should criticize Ryan for the things that set him apart from the President (policies), instead of the things that make him similar to the President (two-facedness).

And I'm not sure why it's important to you to label as "trolling" an argument you merely disagree with. Why not just treat it as an argument you disagree with and then offer a counter-argument? (But you should be sure of your facts before smugly claiming to have "negated" the argument you're responding to.)

There's a complete thought in there somewhere, but I'm not sure where.

@10
"Well, this is kind of silly."

Silly or not, Romney still refuses to give any specifics about the policies that he would implement (other than claiming to repeal whatever Obama did).

So when you claim that people should compare policy between Obama and his opponents you look rather uninformed. Since Obama's opponent has not released any policy specifics.

You are uninformed.

"And I'm not sure why it's important to you to label as 'trolling' an argument you merely disagree with."

Look up "tone troll" and "concern troll".
You fit the criteria. You are a troll.

@12

Silly or not, Romney still refuses to give any specifics about the policies that he would implement (other than claiming to repeal whatever Obama did).

This is a post about Paul Ryan. Paul Ryan is an opponent of Obama and this post is about Ryan. I'm not sure what it is you're trying to say.

Look up "tone troll" and "concern troll".
You fit the criteria. You are a troll.

There are certainly words that describe you that you could look up in the dictionary. Anyway, hopefully, you're a nicer person in reality than you are on the internet. Good luck with that and goodbye.

@13
"There are certainly words that describe you that you could look up in the dictionary."

Yes there are.
But I am far too ... humble ... to discuss my ... dashing ... good looks and ... brilliant ... mind. So please don't bring them up again.

"Anyway, hopefully, you're a nicer person in reality than you are on the internet. Good luck with that and goodbye."

So the tone troll signs off with a veiled accusation that someone is being mean to him.
And in doing so, becomes a self-parody.