>> "inside washington" is brought you in part by the american federation of government employees, proud to make america work. for more information about afge and membership, visit afge.org. . >> production assistance for "inside washington" was provided by allbritton communications and politico, reporting on the legislative, executive, and political arena. >> this week on "inside washington," mitt romney's august surprise. >> i am delighted to have picked as my running mate paul ryan, our great leader. >> it is all about paul ryan and medicare. >> governor romney and i will

strengthen medicare for our seniors. >> they want to turn medicare into a voucher program. >> it is getting nasty out there. >> unchain wall street. they are going to put y'all back in chains. >> this is what an angry and desperate presidency looks like. >> i don't think there's anything courageous about asking for sacrifice from those who can least afford it and don't have clout on capitol hill. >> i guess not hope, ideas not change. it is partisanship. captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- >> washington loves a good fight, at least those of us here on "inside washington". now we have one bit in one corner, the president of the united states, slim and trim and

ready to rumble. in the other corner, congressman paul ryan, also slim, also trim gum also ready. >> the contrasts in this election could not be clearer. we can stick with the current path we are on, a path of debt, doubt, a decline, the path president obama has put us on, or we can get back in business, reapply our principles, and save the american idea. >> conservative republicans appear to be delighted with the choice of paul ryan, although politico reports that some p republican professionals in washington think the choice is a disaster. in a lot of democrats seem to lead in the charts, arguing oft thit puts the focus the economy and on to write an's plan from. charles, i know it you are delighted with it. >> in the romney argument had

been working how -- and not working it a couple of weeks before he chose ryan, it was slipping away. it was becoming a one-on-one about romney's taxes, the bain history, and all of that. now i.t. is completely different terrain, on ideas and ideology. i think it they have a good shot. >> mark? >> i think paul ryan is a good choice. you either go mackerel or micro -- macro or micro, probate and change the dynamic, or go micro and try to pick up a state or constituency. rob portman would have been that. paul ryan is a bold choice, and what it did, i think, and has not got any attention -- it has made mitt romney a better candidate. mitt romney is better when he is around. boston figure this out eight days later, and they will put

the two of them there to get rid romney, who is basically robotic as a candidate, became animated and almost natural in this bromance. >> near human? >> mmm,quasi, neo, crypto. [laughter] >> colby? >> romney all in, and it is good in the sense that the campaign will not be run on vision, which team really has the vision for the country. there is not want to be fuzziness there. obama is clear about the role of government, the role the president should take, and romney is somewhere else. that is the good part. the other thing is that paul ryan brings some intellectual heft to the discussion. >> evan? >> i think it is a bold choice

and i was hopeful that it would bring intellectual heft to the discussion, but the discussion this week has been scuffling around, lying, accusing each other of murder -- not directly, but. the same old -- it is down in the mud. >> by putting paul ryan and the ryan budget in the spotlight, to go back to what you said, mark, that romney does not look as well as he does with paul ryan and does not look as good alone, does it make the top of the ticket look weak? >> you know, that is a concern. i saw one conservative columnist say that if only this ticket or reverse. that is the last thing you want to hear of the presidential nominee. i think if anything, it shows that romney was not fearful of having somebody on who speaks in bold colors. i do think, quite bluntly, that it takes the race from a

referendum on president obama's stewardship and makes it a choice election. that is a risk that some republicans see and some democrats see opportunities in. >> what about the hispanic vote, the women's vote? ryan's vote on the personhood bills? >> that is the difference between the democratic strategy and republican strategy. the difference between the democratic party, a holy roman empire of little interest, larger interest groups, ethnicities, constituencies, and republicans who are running a campaign on running the country did you want to go after hispanics, women, gays. you put them together and you get 51%. as mark indicated, romney did not go for the governor of ohio

or marco rubio to make inroads among hispanics. he went for the national argument, at the idea of reform. he is trying to recreate the conditions for the argument of 2010, and nationalized election on where obama had taken america and the classic left- right issues. that is what the republican strategy is. >> i wish it were as simple as all that. romney is also playing to a certain constituency as well. why shouldn't he? he is looking clearly at a conservative base. he is looking at a suburban base. he is leaving clearly add the religious -- he is looking clearly at the religious evangelical base. >> it is interesting -- >> you cannot just say he is a national candidate -- >> ryan would deliver --

>> the conventional wisdom is that you go to the middle for the general election. it appears that they are going for something different this election, that they are going for the base. ryan is a base move, obama is playing to his base. there's not much middle. it is a different formula. >> how can you be undecided at this point? >> charles talks about this great philosophical divide, and frequently paul ryan is loud and on how great he is great if you look at the paul ryan budget, he wants to cut taxes at the top right down to 25% for everybody. how'd you make of that revenue? cut taxes, and for whom? the richest and best off. but they are very vague, deliberately so, on how they pay for it and what loopholes they

will close. >> we will talk about medicare and social security and the fight for the senior vote. >> you know, the president, i'm told, is talking about medicare today. what i don't think he will be telling people is that the president took $716 billion from the medicare program, raided it to pay for obamacare. >> you hear about that number in line. for years on this program we have criticized elected officials from washington, evan especially, for their cowardice in shying away from the towethid rail of american politics. give this man credit, he has jumped on it. what do you think, mark? >> paul ryan is in and area were key is going to lose. he will make the election about medicare, and which party is more committed to strengthening medicare. the democrats by every measure

of opinion when that debate 2-1 by 25 points. paul ryan, who talks about -- it is unsustainable, evan is absolutely right. we spent $540 billion last year. that number is going on. it has to be addressed, no question about it. do you want the party that has consistently opposed it doing that and putting folks -- >> they are going to demagogue it unbelievable. we joke about throwing granny in the snow. bank enough, there is an ad in florida -- granny in the wheelchair. i thought it was a joke, not an ad. >> on saturday, when romney made the announcement, i heard dr.

krauthammer is say if they are smart, they will get ahead of the curve on medicare. there he is. what do you think? is this working? . >> absolutely. it is and jujitsu of the first order. if you bring up medicare, republicans always lose -- that is empirically false. in the 2010 election, obama had taken $7 billion out of medicare to pay for the on injured in obamacare -- that was a very powerful issue, and there is a very strong element in the shellacking that the democrats had taken. democrats have forgotten, or were foaming at the mouth so that they could attack the republicans on medicare, when ryan was appointed. the counterattack is a brilliant one for one reason. the one republican nominee that was the least equipped to go head-to-head with obama on

obamacare was romney. however, there is one area with there is a difference between romney and obama on national health insurance -- he never took anything out of medicare. obama date. romney can attack obama on obamacare in a way he never could. that is where the democrats have miscalculated. they do not have an answer. >> counter-attack brilliant, colby? >> sununu says they are all on the same page and following their intellectual leader -- >> cbo says -- >> i would never interrupt you, charles. i would never do that. he is not taking money out of medicare, he is not taking -- obama is not. the money in the medicare trust fund is the money that would be going to providers of medicare

did why do they take the money away? the assumption on to the affordable health care plans to get more and more people get insurance, they will not have to rely -- and injured patients -- uninsured patients in hospitals. that is a perfectly reasonable tactless. it is an ice charge to make and you can say over and over again, but it is not hold up. that is true of what is going on on the republican side. they have these nice little arguments, limbaugh and all the rest, but they don't hold up. >> ryan says that if you are over 55, you are ok. what if you or 54? >> it is interesting, the two parties beverage. democrats believe in insurance exchanges for people under 65, and republicans believe in exchanges, they want to

privatize it for people over 65. republicans don't want exchanges available for anyone under 65, but all of a sudden, age 65, people become discerning an informed and analytical about this. we're talking about paul ryan. mitt romney had a great week date we have to acknowledge the fact that he has addressed his taxes and said that he never paid less than 13% -- >> over 10 years. >> which is about half of what a nurse or firefighter would pay, half of what the president paid. but you know, that is the guy. >> notice how quickly my liberal colleagues on the right bail on the medicare debate -- >> not at all! >> all of a sudden wanted to talk about romney's tax is paid so much error, so little time t. the cbo says that if obamacare were abolished, it would

increase the medicare trust fund by $700 billion. the money was removed. one part ended up in another part. second, you got it exactly wrong. in the ryan plan, if you are already on medicare, or 10 years away, you will not be affected in any way whatsoever ever. the nieto story. >> -- end of story. >> about florida in this medicare argument? how do you deliver florida? >> there is going to be a lot of lying and confusion going on. all this about moving the money from this pot to the spot, they will lose sight of the real issue, which is that the only way you solve medicare is that the government can be involved, it will take the marketplace, too, and that is changing the way we deliver health care to all people. doctors have to go on salary. fee-for-service does not work anymore. there is built-in inflation. you ought to have nurse practitioners taking care of people instead of doctors --

>> in massachusetts, they are running out of doctors. >> here is the big one -- death panels. there is no way we will solve this problem if we keep on spending so much money on the end of life. europe doesn't do it, other countries don't do it. we have a society where sooner or later we will confront this issue of how much money we are going to spend on people as they get ready to die. >> you do want to throw granny over a cliff. >> we have tattoos that say " please resuscitate." >> as my mother was dying, she said to me, "pull the plug," which is an issue we have to confront. >> mark, "the new yorker" -- "he wants to take us to the

early 19th century. >> paul ryan has a budget and he was specific on it. we will cut everything except defense spending. paul ryan sat on the simpson- bowles commission. there were only two elected officials -- give them each credit. dick durbin, a democrat from illinois, tom coburn from oklahoma. why did paul ryan oppose it? it involves raising revenue . evan raised the point, anyone who is thought will raise the same point, that if you want to balance the budget, you have to raise revenue. he has cuts that would cut $130 billion out of food stamps over the next 10 years, which have raised 4 million american children out of poverty last year. this is the kind of cuts you are going to have to have if you don't raise revenues. >> it is not left-wing rhetoric,

it is a fact. his budget will cut deeply into the social safety net. it is going to cut into education. >> he says to be careful that the social safety net is not become a hammock and forced people into a culture of dependency. >> correct, and the best way to do that is to go back to darwinism. >> we are going to be cutting everything. the one thing we keep dancing around is the loophole closing, which benefits, because a lot of those loopholes benefit middle- class people, with mortgage deductions, charitable deductions, having your employer take care of your health care, all that stuff. it has to be at some point on is the address and it is 9. >> i have some of cleanup to do i don't know where to start. >> give the man a room. >> darwinism? give me a break. the budget he proposed was spoken about by the very erskine

bowles, who you all know and like, the chief of staff to clinton, who said it is bold, a good budget, an excellent start. he has this agreement on details. -- he has in disagreement on details could the minister plan - -- the democrats' plan by ron wyden was agreed to by the bipartisan committee appointed by president clinton, they 1990's, on which alice rivlin, clinton's omb director, sat. the same idea of premium support. all these attempts to say that i kiss in return to darwinism is simply complete hyperbole and exaggeration. >> joe biden's matt got him into a lot of trouble again. angry rhetoric this week. >> he is going to let the big banks write their own rules, unchain wall street. they are going to put y'all back

in chains. >> while and reckless accusations that disgrace the office of the presidency. >> the biden, it has gone viral republicans are running hard with it. mitt romney -- "take your campaign of division and head back to chicago." how did the white house handled this one, colby? >> not well, by ignoring that -- >> the president sort of -- >> not welcome it the thing about biden that bothered some people, myself included, that you don't have to resort to colloquialisms when talking to african-americans. "y'all." if romney is elected with paul ryan, we will go back to a system of benign neglect, where

serious social problems are ignored or just treated -- swept under the rug. there will be a real problem for a lot of people in this country. >> it has already gotten pretty nasty. how much worse can it get? i guess it in their words. >> biden is biden. i don't think he is going to be a disaster, because everybody knows he has a big mouth, and he will shoot his mouth off, so this is just one more. >> as jonathan martin reports and a politico, he is great one-on-one. >> he is an embarrassment. the only reason i take it seriously and take umbrage is because the guy is so off the wall that you sort of expected. he is like manny ramirez. he catches and out with only one out in the inning, and he tosses the ball into the stands. manny being manny. this is a guy that nobody takes

seriously. i think there is a fitness problem here. the bar for biden is so low because of all the crazy stuff he says that you got to ask yourself, is this a guy you want a heartbeat away? >> all the crazy stuff he says -- i don't know what it is, but i am sure we will get -- >> y'all gonna be going back in chains -- >> colby is absolutely right. not only was it offensive, it was patronizing. but at the same time, joe biden has been a pretty sure footed mice president, effective in reaching working-class families that barack obama is not as comfortable in addressing. in that sense, what we have is a campaign -- evan put his finger on it earlier -- we thought it would be a seminar discussions with paul ryan, and it has been pretty down and dirty.

>> the president has punted on the issue of debt reduction. >> this republican budget is a trojan horse. they have tried to sell us this trickle-down theory as before. >> these gentlemen have and at each other's throats figure to the for couple of years now. we talked about the president's charts that it is social darwinism. we're not talking about romney versus obama on this show. talking about all my -- are talking about paul ryan. >> right, because ryan is a good target. if obama wants to run against them, the movement conservatives, the tea party, that is ryan. romney is sort of a cipher. >> he laid down the marker. he provided the plan, provided documents that you can respond to. >> and the irony is that the reason he has is because the

president hasn't. he said on july 11, 27, in a press conference -- it wasn't in secret -- no matter how much you raise taxes, medicare is insolvent and unsustainable. as he presented the plan? now. his treasury secretary was asked by a riot in house hearings, do you have a plan on medicare? the answer was, "no, but we don't like yours and." >> who is going to win this debate, mark? >> the president will win the debate if it is on health care. even bill paul ryan sets the hearts of conservatives fluttering, he is flying at a different altitude. he is getting scrutiny he has not had. "the wall street journal" had

four the letters requesting stimulus money, even though he said he had never done a great he voted for part d medicare and funded. this is the budget hawk. all of a sudden he is going to get the kind of scrutiny that a president gets, and deservedly and rightly so. we are going to find out what he is made of. >> that's what democrats want. the idea of running on medicare, on a plan, on a budget, what is sustainable and what is not is completely alien. the administration has run away from all the issues for a full term. >> evan? >> not too many congressmen have been in that position, so he has never really been in the majors. i do think, although it did not happen this week, he does have the chance to elevate the debate here. my only hope for this election,

which has been basically in the mud and on the low road, is a greater conversation about what is government good for it and he engages on that. >> you get the last word. see you next week. >> "inside washington" is brought you in part by the american federation of government employees, proud to make america work. for more information about afge and membership, visit afge.org.