Paul Mason On Paul Ryan

Newsnight economics editor Paul Mason has put together a little hit piece on Paul Ryan. Under the pretext of examining whether or not Ryan’s budget proposals will help the US in fiscal crisis, Mason attacks and demonizes.

Could Paul Ryan’s plans fix US debt?

Hands up all those who think we’re going to get an honest examination of those plans. Nobody?

Mason’s opening salvo tells you it’s an attack. Right away he claims that in a matter of days Ryan has “polarized US politics”. What? Haven’t Mardell and the rest of them been telling us that the country’s politics have been polarized and more divided than ever before since the nasty Tea Party got busy? All of a sudden we’re polarized?

The video clip of Ryan is cut short before we get to actual policy points, allowing through just a statement about cutting spending in general. So far, you’re not informed at all about the actual plans.

First expert commentator: this benefits the President. How does this help examine whether or not Ryan’s plans will benefit or harm the country? Don’t be silly: that’s not what Mason’s goal is at all. His real goal is show that Ryan is bad for the country, and a bad choice for Romney. Whether or not Ryan’s policies help the President in campaign rhetoric is irrelevant to a discussion about Ryan’s plans fixing the debt. But that’s what Mason gives you.

Then Mason plays an excerpt of Ryan giving the President a hard time over budget issues. This video has been making the rounds of the Rightosphere lately, as evidence of why Romney chose him. So the Beeboids do pay attention after all. But listen to what Mason says next. Ryan wants to cut Welfare and Food Stamps, apparently. And, “says, Ryan, growth would follow.” So that’s it, is it? Crushing the poorest and most vulnerable is Ryan’s recipe for success, eh?

It’s the simplest trick in the world: use the most general terms possible, no details, and claim “accuracy”. In fact, even the mandarins at the government program themselves admit that it’s more about putting back some means-testing as a way to get spending back to 2008 levels. Sure, they describe it as the cruel wresting of vital support for “low-income families”, but that’s their job. They’re not about fixing the debt problem. Mason is giving you a talking point more than he’s giving you a useful fact. Of course, the BBC can claim “accuracy” here, because Ryan’s plan would, in fact, cut expenditure on these programs. The hows and whys are apparently irrelevant.

But that’s not even the real point, is it? This is supposed to be about whether or not Ryan’s budget ideas will save the country. Mason, it seems, has no interest in giving you any information with which to decide for yourselves. Instead, he’s giving you partisan attack points. Then the biased reporting really kicks in.

Mason next shows a clip from Ryan’s recent stump appearance in Iowa. He got heckled, and Mason uses this as proof that “the Democrat half of the country” doesn’t like him. Again, we get no policy statement from him, just the bit where he gets heckled.

I’d like to pause for a moment and ask defenders of the indefensible to show me examples of the BBC showing the President getting heckled and reporting it as proof that a portion of the country has a legitimate objection to His policies.

As for the Ryan clip, all we see is him criticizing the hecklers, which is followed immediately by footage of the President having a great old time meeting some other Iowans. He’s at ease, smiling and pressing the flesh, complimenting the local prowess in sno-cone making, and nearly kissing a baby. No hecklers, no negatives, no hint that part of the country might object to any of His policies.

However, I have to ask if this footage was included in the interests of “balance”? If so, why? This is supposed to be about Ryan and his budget ideas. Actually, Mason cleverly uses this as a segue to support his rather fatuous statement that this election is suddenly about “where you’re from”. It’s bogus because Ryan was teasing. Anybody who doesn’t rely on or trust the BBC for their news on US issues will know very well about just how ugly and violent the Democrats in Wisconsin can get when they don’t like a politician. Ryan wasn’t seriously saying those hecklers could never be from Iowa or Wisconsin. He was just making a weak crack about them being rude. For Mason to take that and spin it into a larger issue of some kind of regional divide is even weaker. Now, one could make a case for the South not being so supportive of the President, but that’s all racism, according to the Left and the BBC, and not because they think Ryan’s budget ideas are sound. But that’s another argument altogether, and won’t help Mason’s agenda.

Then we get a liar from the Washington Post. She plays the class war game, much beloved by Mason and the BBC. The WaPo hack claims that choosing Ryan is proof that Romney wants to cut taxes on the rich, full stop. Once again the BBC can claim the vaguest definition of “accuracy” here, because a tax cut across the board – for everyone – will by definition include tax cuts for the rich. This is, in fact, Romney’s plan, something the BBC leaves out in order to seriously mislead you and grossly misrepresent the facts. Mason gets away with it this time because it’s some US mouthpiece saying it and not him. So where’s the balance, the explanation of even one single relevant detail of Ryan’s or Romney’s plan never mind whether or not it will help fix the debt crisis? Don’t make me laugh.

After this, Mason gives us another White House talking point: it’s Congress’s fault. No mention that the Republican-led House has passed a budget – twice – while the Democrat-led Senate has blocked it and failed to pass one in three years and counting. No mention that the President’s own offerings have been such a joke that the CBO couldn’t even score it and His Plan For Us never passed the laugh test enough for anyone in Congress to even consider it.

Mason gives us one last generality, that Ryan wants to cut spending in order to promote growth. “But that is one major throw of the dice.” Yes, that’s one opinion: Paul Mason’s. Which is the whole reason the BBC has these titled “editor” positions. It gives them an excuse to allow opinion-mongering in place of real reporting. Not a single second of actual reporting is in evidence here. Instead, it’s carefully selected and edited footage to support Mason’s opinion of Ryan’s fiscal conservatism.

Now that I’ve spent time playing the ball, it’s time to play the man. We know for a fact that Mason is a Marxist, and supports the Occupy movement. We know his political opinions from his tweets and his books and his support for and participation in far-Left organizations and conferences. All that on its own would be enough to cause concern over his capability for impartial reporting, except the BBC doesn’t accept that. Yet now we see his opinion being offered on air, and it’s the same one we see from his extracurricular activities. His personal political bias informs his “reporting”. It’s as plain as day.

Your license fee hard at work, promoting the domestic agenda of the leader of a foreign country.


Described on Twitter as “the most incestuous media love-in in history” and “an activists who’s who“, Paul Mason’s party to celebrate the launch of his new book “Why It’s Kicking Off Everywhere: the New Global Revolutions” ended in chaos last night.

Mason abandoned his own party and recommended that other factions do the same. An anarchic hardcore remained. Lefties, eh?

Here’s a flavour of the evening from the Guardian’s James Ball:


Newsnight's Paul Mason puts the case for rioting

Fascinating insight into the BBC’s Paul Mason here.

“In what will doubtless be seen as further evidence of a Left-wing agenda at the BBC, Paul Mason, the economics editor of Newsnight, posits the case in a new book that the summer riots were part of a “global revolution”.

The publishing house Verso gives a taste of the line that Mason takes inWhy It’s Kicking Off Everywhere: The New Global Revolutions in its latest catalogue.
Beneath a picture of the 144-year-old furniture store House of Reeves ablaze in Croydon during the riots in August, Mason is quoted as saying: “What has started with students in Millbank now erupts across the poverty-stricken streets of London: the network defeats the hierarchy; the political elite flounders, bereft of explanations.”

The bit that makes me wonder is here did Mason gain his credentials to talk about economics? As far as I can see he is qualified as a music teacher.


It looks like Paul Mason’s witterings on the #Occupy movement are causing lots of concern. Here we have a take on his latest pronouncements from B-BBC’s Alan…

“Paul Mason is quite scary…this man is the editor of Newsnight…supposedly a flagship BBC current affairs programme, and yet the editor is reliving his student days….romancing the revolution.

The sheer idiocy of what he says is in fact probably beyond even what many a student drunk on Che Guevara and cheap beer would dare to utter. His main problem is that he believes the MSM doesn’t understand the protests….really? They understand all too well…they are the usual raggle taggle mob that appears to have a go at the ‘Man’ and whose agenda is pure anti-Establishment without any ideas of their own on how to put the economy back n the road.

‘My generation of radicals and breakers-down never found anything to take the place of the old virtues of work and courage and the old graces of courtesy and politeness.’ ~ F. Scott Fitzgerald

Mason tells us that…

‘Though the place was swarming with media, including a hilarious spoof of a Fox News reporter wearing a flak jacket, the main complaint is that the media is ignoring them and does not understand them. This latter point I think is largely true.’

Mason likes to compare the protestors to the ‘Arab Springers’….what’s that old saying? ‘Careful what you wish for’ as the Egyptians and Co are finding out.

He also suggests this is all because of the internet encouraging a lovey dovey world harmony and single global ‘mind’…’But these protests are a powerful signal worldwide. Their mere existence shows that people are determined to “think globally” about routes out of this crisis – at a time when economics is driving politicians down the route of national solutions. However marginalised they are politically – and in some countries, above all America and Greece, they have broken out of marginalisation – it is still a fact: in 1931, as the remnants of Globalisation 1.0 collapsed, there were no mass international protests against austerity.’

For a Newsnight editor to have never heard of International Communism is strange….especially as so many of his work colleagues are advocates for that ideology….and has he not heard of the IMF etc?

It’s a new democratic movement…for the people by the people….four legs good two legs bad type of thing.

‘What is absolutely clear however, is what they are determined to do: it’s much bigger than any single-issue campaign or cause. They mean to limit the power of finance capital and build a more equal society, while rejecting the hierarchical methods of the parties that once claimed to do so. In this sense the movement is a kind of replacement social democracy; a mirror image of the besuited young people who populate the think tanks of Labour, the SPD, the US Democrats etc.’

and its interesting his final take on the situation…it’s the Banker’s fault, all of it…..’It poses the question “who pays for the banking crisis” very acutely. And large numbers of people are now realising it is going to be them, and more painfully, their children. ‘

No mention of Labour’s huge public sector job creation scheme which put millions on the government payroll and paid them out of borrowings which would be paid off by their children who will also be paying their parent’s, possibly grandparent’s, pensions as well as trying to make a living for themselves.

 As to politicians failing to make things more equal….well the facts tell a different story….

Here in an interactive graph at the end of the report, the BBC’s very own anti-Tory exocet missile Mark Easton, self destructs and reveals that the evil capitalist Tories presided over a time when income began to be far more fairly distributed amongst the population…..


As the anarcho-communist anti-Semitic street rabble infest our financial centres, you can rely on the BBC to cheer-lead for them. Here’s Paul Mason giving them a shout-out..

“Occupy Everywhere, then, is the kind of movement you get when people start to believe mainstream politicians have lost their principles, or are trapped by vested interests, or are all crooked.”