This should fall under the "you can't make this stuff up" category.
Once again, Rep. Paul Ryan was on a Sunday morning talk show and was completely dismantled in front of a national audience when ABC News host Jonathan Karl confronted Ryan about praising the sequester option in August of 2011 only to turn around and blame President Obama for the sequester cuts.
In his response to Karl, Ryan weaseled ...
"Remember the Super Committee in addition to those caps was supposed to come up with 1.2 trillion in savings. The Republicans on the super committee offered even higher revenues in exchange for spending cuts as part of that. It was rejected by the president and the Democrats. So no resolution occurred and therefore the sequester is occurring."
Republicans offered "higher revenues" on the super committee? Really?? But it was rejected by Obama and the Democrats??
First off, Obama was not on the super committee and had no vote in the matter. Secondly, Ryan is implying Republicans on the super committee were willing to raise "higher revenues" than whatever was at play in exchange for what we can assume were even deeper spending cuts? However, Ryan refuses to raise any revenue at all right now to offset the cuts the sequester will bring?
Ryan also claims Obama "got his" increased revenue. But he forgets to say that was part of a different deal, just like previous "sequesters" and spending cuts were also part of different deals. The super committee was charged with finding $1.2 trillion in savings, and Ryan implies Republicans wanted even more, did not get them, so he voted against the committee thereby triggering the sequester cuts.
Republicans also think they got something on Obama since Bob Woodward claimed the sequester idea came first from the White House. I won't argue with where the idea first came from, but the sequester cuts became operative law ONLY when the Simpson/Bowles Debt Commission failed. That’s when Ryan voted for the sequester “idea” a second time. Again, Obama was not a member of the commission.
Both parties also acknowledge that everyone's fingerprints are all over the sequester option as part of the debt deal. But only the 18 members of the Simpson/Bowles debt Commission had their fingers on the trigger. Once again, Paul Ryan was one of only three House Republicans who pulled that trigger. Not Obama. It is Ryan who desperately wants those cuts to happen. He has repeatedly said so.
The Hill Excerpt:
Ryan added that the cuts needed to happen because Republicans can’t risk losing the only leverage they have when it comes to cutting spending. “I think the sequester is going to happen, because that $1.2 trillion in spending cuts, we can’t lose those spending cuts, that was to pay for the last debt-ceiling increase, let alone any future increase.”
So now we arrive at the point where we know Paul Ryan willingly opposed the compromise necessary to prevent the automatic cuts of the sequester option when he voted against the Simpson/Bowles Commission AND now will not accept any increased revenues to help pay for the costs to cancel the sequester. We also know Ryan is using the threat of the automatic cuts as "leverage" to advance his party's agenda - not the country's.
Speaking of the damage the sequester cuts might bring, according to George Mason University the state of Wisconsin will lose 36,555 jobs. Again, Ryan and Republicans know how devastating the cuts are and they don't care. In fact, they demand that the cuts happen. They pulled the trigger on the sequester - not Obama. They own it. lock, stock and barrel.
Watch the Jonathan Karl / Paul Ryan exchange below...
Raw Story - ABC Host Confronts Paul Ryan On Sequester
Think Progress - ABC News Calls Out Paul Ryan For Hypocrisy Over Looming Budget Cuts