Let the Campaign Edit Wars Begin

Hugh Pickens writes writes "Megan Garber writes that in high school, Paul Ryan's classmates voted him as his class's 'biggest brown noser,' a juicy tidbit that is a source of delight for his political opponents but considered an irrelevant piece of youthful trivia to his supporters. 'But it's also a tension that will play out, repeatedly, in the most comprehensive narrative we have about Paul Ryan as a person and a politician and a policy-maker: his Wikipedia page,' writes Garber. Late Friday night, just as news of the Ryan choice leaked in the political press — the first substantial edit to that page removed the 'brown noser' mention which had been on the page since June 16. The Wikipedia deletion has given rise to a whole discussion of whether the mention is a partisan attack, whether 'brown noser' is a pejorative, and whether an old high school opinion survey is notable or relevant. As of this writing, 'brown noser' stands as does a maybe-mitigating piece of Ryan-as-high-schooler trivia: that he was also voted prom king. But that equilibrium could change, again, in an instant. 'Today is the glory day for the Paul Ryan Wikipedia page,' writes Garber. 'Yesterday, it saw just 10 [edits]. Today, however — early on a Saturday morning, East Coast time — it's already received hundreds of revisions. And the official news of the Ryan selection, of course, is just over an hour old.' Now Ryan's page is ready to host debates about biographical details and their epistemological relevance. 'Like so many before it, will be a place of debate and dissent and derision. But it will also be a place where people can come together to discuss information and policy and the intersection between the two — a town square for the digital age.'"

Comments

If Obama's BIRTH can be an issue

[crazyjj]

Then I'm pretty sure that what Paul Ryan did in high school can be too.

But seriously, I'm a lot less concerned with what Paul Ryan did in high school that what he has done since. I'm not sure what Romney was thinking on this one (excite a base that was ALREADY excited, that would have come out to vote against Obama no matter who you chose?). But he just gave the Democrats an incredible gift. Because he didn't just excite the Republican base, he also just excited the Democratic base (and scared the hell out of the independents, and conceded Florida). Many Democrats were disenchanted with Obama and probably wouldn't have come out to vote for him again in the fall. But stacking him up against an insane-right-wing Ayn Rand ideologue who wants to abolish Medicare and Social Security to give tax cuts to the wealthy is a pretty fucking great way to motivate them. I'm not sure if this is some form of political suicide or just incredibly bad advisers, but either way--speaking as a Dem--thanks, buddy.

Re:If Obama's BIRTH can be an issue

[dtmancom]

Obama's place of birth is an actual Constitutional issue. Ryan's cliques in high school are not.

Re:If Obama's BIRTH can be an issue

[h4rr4r]

Baklava? Are you some sort of communist?

I think you mean like a pastry chef making freedom crescents.

Re:If Obama's BIRTH can be an issue

[Anonymous Coward]

Obama's place of birth is an actual Constitutional issue. Ryan's cliques in high school are not.

It is a Constitutional issue only because he is black. Nobody gave a shit that McCain was born on a military base in Panama or that Romney's father was born in Mexico when he tried to run for President. But Obama had to have been ineligible. It is a double-standard and it is racism. And it is also factually incorrect. So fuck you for bringing it up again.

Re:If Obama's BIRTH can be an issue

[bedroll]

You're right, Obama's place of birth gives us an excellent opportunity to examine areas of Constitutional law that are commonly misunderstood. For example, where he was born means absolutely nothing because the citizenship of his mother is not in question. So, like George Romney - Mitt's father, who was born in Mexico - President Obama is a natural born citizen regardless of where he was born. The rest is racism and xenophobia.

As for the usefulness of Ryan's brown-noser status: Well it's not particularly important except that Americans like to know the personality of their prospective leaders. When Biden was picked it wasn't particularly important to note that he's a gaff machine, except in the personal context of how others will judge him. Either way, if it is verifiable and people are interested in the information as a part of his profile then it should meet the minimum standards for inclusion in Mr. Ryan's Wikipedia page.

Re:If Obama's BIRTH can be an issue

[sinij]

If you want to vote Republican ticket because of Ryan's Plan - make sure to read it. Ryan's Plan does include privatization of social security (no specifics on how, mandatory 401ks or 'contracted' to Goldman Sachs?) and turns medicare into voucher system (who will provide individual affordable healthcare coverage to sick and poor out of this population remains unclear). It also includes a lot of tax cuts to corporations and top 1%, Romney for example would pay less than 1% taxes under Ryan's plan. Last but not least Ryan's plan does not at all addresses defense spending - so no cuts there whatsoever. Fundamental problem with Ryan's Plan is that as far as fiscally conservative plans go - it isn't one. Even if you take his "closing tax loopholes" projections at a face value, any and all savings are channeled into tax cuts, not reduction of deficit. Last but not least - austerity measures that are bound to lower GDP (just look what austerity did in GB), debt/GDP will continue increasing under Ryan's Plan due to hit to GDP and no corresponding reduction in debt. In closing, also make sure to examine Ryan's voting record - every Bush tax cut, every expense, TARP, bailouts were voted YES. His rhetoric aside, fiscal conservative he is not.

Re:If Obama's BIRTH can be an issue

[crazyjj]

Yes, except Medicare is open to all seniors over 65. His "replacement" is open to everyone too--everyone who can pay the difference between their voucher and what their insurance actually costs, that is:

If the chosen plan costs more than the premium-support [i.e., their voucher], the senior would pay the difference.

Oh, got a pre-existing medical condition that makes your insurance cost more than your voucher? Tough luck, grandma.

Re:If Obama's BIRTH can be an issue

[omnichad]

People believe what they see on the "news." Fox News has the legal right to lie. I know the public should have more skepticism of the press, but it isn't wrong to expect journalistic integrity. I think the law should be revised to make someone very afraid of reporting anything that isn't true.

Re:If Obama's BIRTH can be an issue

[rolfwind]

Of course, having passed more of his budgets through Congress than Obama has (who can't even get Congressional Democrats to vote for his ideas in bill form), Ryan has had to be the adult in the room and actually consider the effects of things on the deficit and future entitlements.

Sigh, no.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/apr/06/mitt-romney/romney-says-obama-failed-pass-budget/
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/218931-house-clobbers-obama-budget-proposal-in-0-414-vote

From both articles:

White House officials said Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.), the sponsor of the alternative, was using Obama's top-line spending and revenue numbers as a budget proposal, without any specifics. On the House floor, Budget Committee Ranking Member Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) agreed that Mulvaney's amendment was not, in fact, Obama's entire budget proposal.
"This is politics at its absolute worst: presenting something as the President's budget without the policy detail, without the explanation to the American people about what's in the President's budget," he said. "And as a result, he presents a very misleading version of what the President has asked us to do."

He’s right about the rejection. After Obama submitted his fiscal year 2013 budget proposal on Feb. 13, 2012, House Republicans put it up for a floor vote.

The result: 414-0 against.

The same thing happened a year earlier in the Senate. That vote: 97-0 against. Democrats didn’t support the plan because it has been supplanted by another deficit-reduction plan Obama had later outlined. Republican leaders demanded a vote on Obama’s budget to show that Democrats don’t support any detailed budget blueprint, according to The Hill.

Such votes are taken "just as a means of embarrassing the president and his party," said Patrick Louis Knudsen, a senior fellow with the conservative Heritage Foundation.

"Usually it’s brought up by the opposition party because they generally anticipate that a president’s budget won’t get very much support especially if it has controversial elements to it," he said.

Other experts agree. Said Steve Ellis, of Taxpayers for Common Sense: "That was pure political theater and was done to score rhetorical points."

Basically the votes were taken to score gotchas against the president. The one in the house by erasing all the details and just "basing" it on his big numbers. Of course no one would vote for that.

This VP pick shows that Romney is more interested in governing well and taking on serious issues than he is interested in short-term political gain from a couple of poll points in a swing state or two. Ryan was by far the best serious candidate for the VP job.

Paul Ryan:
Voted YES on $192B additional anti-recession stimulus spending. (Jul 2009)
VVoted YES on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman. (Jul 2006)
Voted YES on making the PATRIOT Act permanent. (Dec 2005)
Voted YES on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage. (Sep 2004)
Voted YES on extending the PATRIOT Act's roving wiretaps. (Feb 2011) Voted YES on $15B bailout for GM and Chrysler. (Dec 2008)
Voted YES on extending the PATRIOT Act's roving wiretaps. (Feb 2011)
Voted YES on allowing electronic surveillance without a warrant. (Sep 2006)
Voted YES on extending unemployment benefits from 39 weeks to 59 weeks. (Oct 2008)
Voted NO on removing US armed forces from Afghanistan. (Mar 2011
)
Voted YES on declaring Iraq part of War on Terror with no exit date. (Jun 2006)
http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Paul_Ryan.htm/

Re:If Obama's BIRTH can be an issue

[Dodgy G33za]

So let me get this straight. The richest country in the world can't afford free health care for all of its citizens?

But many other countries, such as the UK, Australia, Sweden, Germany, Cuba, can.

I dunno how the intricacies of your society work but from where I am standing (in Australia) I would say something over there is seriously fucked.

Maybe you just like to keep the poor people in your society poor. That's fine. Maybe you should have let the south win the civil war though, just to make it a bit easier.

Re:If Obama's BIRTH can be an issue

[DrXym]

Sorry but no. No amount of evidence would convince them that he was born in Hawaii. Not in 2008 and not now. Obama had already released information about his birth and there was plenty of circumstantial evidence that he was born in Hawaii such as an announcement in the births column of a local newspaper. Was that enough? No the birthers proclaimed, it was all forgeries! So they shifted the goalposts and demanded the long form cert. When that was delivered eventually (probably by an exasperated Obama) that too was decried as a forgery.

The problem here is that birthers are conspiracy kooks. No amount of evidence will change their minds. Evidence is not something to be taken at face value. Instead it must be demanded, and if by chance it is supplied it must be marginalised and denied and new evidence demanded. It's a tactic common with other denialist causes - 9/11 truthers, anti-vaxxers, creationists etc.

Re:If Obama's BIRTH can be an issue

[AF_Cheddar_Head]

An American GI here, I have experienced the healthcare in Australia and England, all I can say is if the health care in those countries is dubious then the health care in the US is atrocious. Why is it most Americans that criticize the health care in Europe, Canada and Australia have never experienced it first hand and just take it for granted ours is better?

Don't they lock those things?

[smoore]

Why hasn't it been reverted to the preannouncment page and locked for editing with the addition of "prospective VP candidate for the Republican party? Seems like the best and only proper solution.

interesting problem

[Trepidity]

I'm tempted to say that these kinds of articles aren't where Wikipedia works best. Articles where the majority of the editors are partisans, rather than scholars or knowledgeable enthusiasts, tend to attract a lot of heat and not as much improvement (I made the mistake once of trying to edit something that was in the Israel-Palestine crossfire).

On the other hand, it's quite possible that Wikipedia has the least bad coverage. It's Paul Ryan article is contentious, edited by partisans on both sides, and may or may not end up in a great state, but every other summary of Ryan I've been able to find so far is worse. Most are either pure attack pieces, or pure hagiographies.

Should have been locked

[smooth wombat]

This is a situation where the page should have locked to prevent the edit wars. Granted, no one knew who the VP pick was going to be, but as soon as humanly possible, the page should have been locked down and only selected individuals allowed to edit it for completeness, not remove things which, while not necessarily relevant, give a broader picture of who the person is.