Paul Ryan is still the Ayn Rand-worshipping idiot he always was but you might have forgotten him since he hasn't been doing interviews since he was driven out of Congress by the further right fringe of the Republican Party he aspired to lead. On Thursday he was on CNBC's Squawk Box with Becky Quaid, talking about inflation, about his new oily special purpose acquisition company, about how far "left" the Biden administration is and about the quality of members of Congress, something he should actually know something about-- but doesn't.
He claimed that when he was in charge of the place members of Congress climbed the ranks based on hard work and abilities. Today, he claims, they rise in the ranks based on their entertainment value. "In the old days, like 10 years ago, if you wanted to do really well in Congress, if you wanted to succeed, you climbed a meritocracy. The measurement of success was policy and persuasion." Always careful to not insult his own party, he added that "The measurement of success was policy and persuasion: Could you persuade your colleagues, your country, your constituents; 'This is the right way to go, here’s a solution'? That’s not necessarily what motivates people anymore. There’s a lot of entertainers in Congress from both parties." Yeah, from both parties... because the Democrats have a lot of Marjorie Traitor Greenes, Ted Cruzes, Madison Cawthorns, Lauren Boeberts, Josh Hawleys, Paul Gosars, Ronny Johnsons, Andy Biggs...
"We have an entertainment wing of the House of the Republican and Democratic Party. The old meritocracy that takes 10, 20 years to climb of being a good policymaker? You can just leapfrog that whole process, be a really good entertainer, have an incredible presence digital, and forget about policymaking and curate a brand for yourself. And so you have entertainers in Congress now."
Ryan's in his 50s and he isn't comfortable with social media and blames it for a lack on bipartisanship-- funny he never mentioned Fox News (of which he is a board member) or Newt Gingrich or the overweening interests of American oligarchs the two parties cater to-- and instead said that "If you are going to entertain, if you are going to try to show that you’re better than everyone else within your own ecosystem" [you will never compromise]... You can just leapfrog that whole process, be a really good entertainer, have an incredible presence-- digital-- and forget about policymaking and curate a brand for yourself. So you have entertainers in Congress now that eschew the policymaking process," the perfect description of the Republican freshman class.
As for his presidential ambitions? "When I decided to become speaker, which actually wasn’t my goal, I knew I was capping myself politically but that was fine. I was okay with that. Because I knew the job requires consensus dealmaking. But that is bad for a brand, that is bad if you are going to entertain, if you’re going to try and show that you’re better than everybody else within your own ecosystem."