A Decent Gentleman

Paul Ryan has always been one of the nicest people in Washington and the place will be worse off without him.

I spent the other night roaming the aisles of a grocery store with a congressman who says nice things about President Trump on television while really not liking him. I have heard from a good many people who have had similar experiences. Green rooms in Washington are full of Republicans who cheer him on publicly and root against him privately. Decency and honesty seem hard to come by.

Decency and honesty will be a bit harder to come by with Paul Ryan's departure. Liberals hate him as the man who shoved granny off the cliff and many conservatives hate him as a tool or leader of the establishment. The reality is Paul Ryan is a profoundly decent and kind person who led a herd of cats as best he could. He has always been far more at home hunting or working through policy papers. But he rose to the Speaker's chair because he was the only man trusted enough by the various Republican factions to keep them together.

Ryan was and is trusted not because he is the most conservative, though he is far more so than people give him credit. Ryan is trusted because he's a nice guy. In Washington, nice guys who are successful are harder to find. More and more people think you have to be a braying jackass to be successful. Paul Ryan never did think that and never behaved like that.

We live in an age where if you don't like someone's politics then you don't like that person. It is really easy to not like people these days. It is harder to be decent and to try to like. I think Paul Ryan tried very hard to be decent and kind. I very much like him, even though we often disagreed on policy. And, to be honest, I often got the impression Paul Ryan was far more conservative on issues than he let on publicly, but knew he could only go so far right without losing Republicans in the other direction. His biggest struggle was finding the balance without his Republican coalition collapsing.

I am going to miss him on Capitol Hill, but I am happy for his family to have him home. Paul Ryan is now older than his dad was when his dad died. He's going to be able to experience a level of relationship and friendship with his kids that he never got to have with his own dad. Not being distracted by the pettiness of small things in Washington will be a positive for his family in that regard. So God speed to him and to his family.

I'm glad he is leaving. He could have been more supportive of Devin Nunes, gowdy and the House Oversight, intelligence and Judicial Committees. That only happened after quite a stink was unearthed about the Democrats' involvement in the Russia Dossier/scam that is still doing the work of undermining a sitting president, without any evidence. I expect some to like Paul Ryan, but if they listened to him talk, more than one minute, all you would hear was the result of an enema at the wrong end. I guess a smile goes a long way, when good governance isn't around. If reaching across the aisle is so good, why can't everything just right itself by it? Making deals with the Devil must be better than giving Trump credit for doing his job, which is something I see, all too often. My take on Ryan's annointing is just that. He waited for someone to hand pick him for the Speaker's job, and it just looked like he was playing out his Hillary card, the one about being entitled. I consider him the same as Eric Cantor. He needed to go.

WHAT? specific benefit did Mr. Ryan accomplish as Speaker. He morphed from Fiscal Conservative to a drunken SPENDER. Being a "nice" guy is not reason to support his ineffective Speakership. He came to define the RINO WHIG Democrat Lite Repub along with the infamous Senator McConnell.

Do you realize Devin Nunes has been in D.C. for 15 years and has a Liberty Score of F - 36%? Trey Gowdy after 7 years has a D - 69%. (Ryan is an F - 34%). Nunes writes one memo and people think he is Jim Jordan all of a sudden. Gowdy is better, but still falls well short of expectations. He is good at grandstanding in a Congressional hearing that accomplishes nothing and we want to crown him as Mr. Conservative.

I will agree with you on his voting record. That makes him not conservative, not a bad person. Ryan can be a nice guy and not be conservative. As to his personal convictions, a person is only as conservative as they vote. It does not good to support more conservative policy if they don't follow through with a vote. It is like having the best hands on the football team, but being afraid to catch it over the middle because you might get hit. The hands are completely worthless. All that matters is can you make the catch in the game. Paul Ryan, nice guy and all, far too often dropped the pass. However, Ryan is probably the best we could realistically get as Speaker and miles better than McConnell. The real problem is McConnell, not Ryan or even Trump. A good Senate Majority leader would have moved a lot more through and Trump would sign anything for a "win". He isn't going to lead, but he will take credit and sign it.

Erick specifically said he didn't endorse the things said, he was just reporting them. I think the purpose was to shine a light into the inner workings of the sausage factory. Too many people took it as an endorsement of these views. I took it as a reminder of how morally bankrupt, disingenuous and self-absorbed the average politician is. We can never be reminded of that enough. Too many people (directed from Drudge, I believe) took issue because someone insulted their "Precious". My point is reinforced by the fact that who reads that information and thinks highly of the Congressman? Even if you agree with the rant, the guy is lying to people and spinning for Trump on Fox. If you don't agree with the rant, then the comments speak for themselves. For those that want to look at Trump as a applaud what you like and criticize what you don't, he doesn't look good either because I have criticism for his public and private stances.


We need that, but we aren't going to get it. There is no way Jim Jordan, Mark Meadows, etc. would be elected Speaker. There seem to be two likely possibilities, Scalise (Liberty Score F-49%) and McCarty (Liberty Score F-34%). Of the two, Scalise is better, but even he doesn't have a passing grade on the Liberty Scorecard. What I wonder is why do we keep picking Speakers from the left 1/3 of the Caucus? Paul Ryan is 23rd worst out of 234. McCarthy is 29 out of 234. Scalise is 77 out of 234. Even the median GOP Congressman still has a failing score.


I pray someday that the Resurgent will have the means to find a home with the option to disable the comments section, and stop being a forum for those who are white hot over "the swamp" and "the deep state." Things being as they are, I'll try to have some fun, and maybe take more hot wind out of the sails of passers by in the process.

"...the socialist Marxist communist democrats." Superlative much? I may have proof positive (to you) beyond Paul's voting record that he is truly a closet commie:
“There was a time when I would talk about a difference between ‘makers’ and ‘takers’ in our country, referring to people who accepted government benefits. But as I spent more time listening, and really learning the root causes of poverty, I realized I was wrong. ‘Takers’ wasn’t how to refer to a single mom stuck in a poverty trap, just trying to take care of her family. Most people don’t want to be dependent.” ~clearly a sloth enabler

Oh, and did you know Erick is no less friendly to David Axelrod, a clearly eeeeeeviiiiil and most definitely maliciously duplicitous engineer of the downfall of our nation, than he is with Paul Ryan? Well here you go

Sarcasm aside, I wish people were less prone to presuming ill will and projecting a lack of authenticity, on both the left and the right. As for the right, I hope that the phrase "bleeding heart liberal" will take back the place used by "social justice warrior," and start approaching political opponents with compassion, presuming sincerity until truly proven otherwise.

"The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."


Ryan is a theological hypocrite, in that while he poses as a devout Roman Catholic, his true devotion is to Ayn Rand, whose philosophy is antithetical to Christianity. In her view, greed is good, charity bad, consideration of others career-damaging and generosity useless. I don't "presume ill will", I conclude it based on the empirical evidence before me. Ryan has made his career on screwing the poor and middle-class. Now that his agenda no longer works, he follows the Ayn Randian protocol to the end: "If you can't win, quit." He has no honor, and is no gentleman.

I like him too. Sadly, too many so-called conservatives are quick to pass judgement on him because they have no idea how difficult it is to get something accomplished when you are unwilling to negotiate. I'm glad he got to reform the tax code before leaving office.

I look it up and, having won a general election at the federal level, Paul Ryan is entitled to be referred to as "The Honorable" Paul Ryan. Speaking as a pinko, commie liberal Whore for Satan Democrat, he's one of the few politician who can truly live up to that moniker, even if I strongly disagreed with many/most of his political views. Meanwhile, yet another attendant/orderly has left the Trump loony-bin, leaving that patient there with yet more power that they clearly can't handle.


Why don't you skip the comments. No one makes you read them. Read the article and move on. I'm not sure why it's necessary to disable them in order to not read them.


Erick, do decent gentlemen say that they're going to defund Planned Parenthood, then, when they have the POWER to do so, renege on the promise and FULLY fund it, while completing dropping it as an issue? Where is the consistency? Is the funding of Planned Parenthood something that you know longer care about politically?


Maybe he had his reasons. Maybe there would have been some side effect or problem and keeping the funding was a necessary comprise to prevent/solve that problem. Perhaps he simply didn't want to throw the fetus out with the bathwater.

Because that left 1/3 of the caucus is that place where all the power resides. If it anything else, we would have that conservative majority that you and I want.

Erick, I hear what you say, and an ineffective Majority Leader still remains ineffective regardless of his marvelous qualities as a human, father and friend. As you say, Washington will be poorer with out his integrity, but is is not clear the House Repubs will be poorer with different leadership. Our challenge is to be both effective and have integrity. Seems Washington sees those two attributes as "either/or" rather than "and". :-(

I call BS on this on the Ryan - Rand connection. I sure would appreciate it if Rep Ryan were more of a libertarian, but Ryan has been far more of the true catholic compassion-conservative, and sadly his reign has simply been an extension of the Failure Theatre we saw under Boehner. the One Job the caucus had was to repeal Obamacare and they couldn't even get a wimpy 1/2 repeal to Trump's desk, while spending carries on.

A nice guy? Yes. Avery smart guy? Yes. Effective as a Speaker of the House. Not at all. Walking away from the Hastert Rule was his undoing.

Paul RINO listens to his democRAT wife more than to his republican voters or colleagues. He's very left leaning. I loved him in his debate with the silly, babbling old man, Gropin' Joe Biden wherein Ryan was serious, thoughtful, and to-the-point while Biden laughed and poo-pooed his way through. But I think he was a better VP candidate than Speaker of the House. He has bowed to the left on every issue, and while the fake president was in charge, he even started to look moslem. I have read that he attends a DC mosque almost daily. Wonder why that is???

Yes Erick, nice, trusted, decent, honest, kind, etc.--but utterly ineffective at even starting to eliminate our 22 Trillion in debt, planned parenthood, or Obamacare. Those are the promises Republicans and Paul Ryan ran on. Republicans finally control the key branches of government. But the Republicans led by Paul Ryan have accomplished little of consequence. I'd rather be led by a ruthless fighter for conservative values, Newt Gingrich with whatever flaws he might have, than Paul Ryan.