I've made no secret of my grave disappointment in Paul Ryan over his support of the $700 billion bailout.  It seems as if Ryan is now abandoning all his principles regarding conservative government, and is now also supporting the bailout of the big 2.5 auto manufacturers:

U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said Wednesday he would favor assisting the ailing American automakers immediately, using the $25 billion Congress set aside previously for development of more fuel-efficient vehicles.

But Ryan's comments came as it seemed increasingly unlikely that Congress will act on an auto industry rescue package before it adjourns for the year.

Ryan, in an interview, said the situation now sits largely in the hands of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who must consider a Republican-backed plan to use the energy money.

Like the Bush administration and other Republican lawmakers, Ryan opposes using a portion of the $700 billion Wall Street bailout fund to aid the Big Three auto manufacturers, fearing it would set a precedent for other industries to rush to the government's purse strings.

"The treasury money was designed to save the financial system itself from collapse, not a specific company or industry," Ryan said.

Ryan said he would use the already-allocated energy efficiency money now, and deal with the issue of if or how to replace it later.

Ahhh.. the bailout was "designed" to save the financial system, not a specific company or industry.  But the money that was "designed" for increasing energy efficiency can be used for a purpose other that increasing energy efficiency?  That is acceptable?  We'll "deal with the issue" on how to replace it later?  This is fiscal restraint?  Of course, the bailout money that was designed for saving the financial system isn't being used in the way it was designed already.  Paulson has already said that TARP money won't be used for buying illiquid assets anymore, even though all of the oversight designed into Paul Ryan's bill was centered around buying those assets.  In fact, Paulson has admitted that he had no legal right to do anything he's done.  Of course, nobody is calling for his prosecution.

In fact, Paul Ryan is playing the part of a two face.  The man who used to be a principled fiscal conservative helped to create "A Roadmap for America's Future".  The key planks to this roadmap include revamping our system of entitlements, curbing federal spending, and a smarter taxation system.  Overall, the plan is well thought out, and has a real chance of success if ever implemented.  Paul ever recently lamented in several op-ed's how politicians are "unwilling to take political risk" to support the roadmap:

Our party has become too fearful of our own ideas. Since 1997, congressional Republicans began a steady retreat from principled leadership to political expediency. A party built on spending discipline and government reform succumbed to the siren songs of government expansion and earmarked giveaways. Republicans squandered the opportunity to limit and reshape the relationship between the federal government and the individual.

I ran on these bold ideas and innovative solutions in a congressional district carried by Barack Obama -- yet I received 64% of the vote. I challenge my colleagues to rethink political risk taking. Taking on our most serious fiscal challenges will restore relevancy to the Republican Party and will keep alive America's commitment to freedom and prosperity.

Retreat from principled leadership to political expediency?  You mean like passing one of the largest nationalization plans in United States history in less than a week with hardly any debate?  If you paid attention during that election when Ryan claimed 64% of the vote, you'll notice that none of his ads featured him talking about his support of the bailout bill, yet several of them talked about the Roadmap for America.  His op-ed pieces since the election have all stressed the importance of the Roadmap, and none of them have talked about how the Roadmap might be affected by these bailouts, or his talking about his "proud stance in voting for the bailout".  What is he hiding?  If he is not ashamed of his support for these things, then why do his op-ed pieces not reflect that?

Ryan is trying to have it both ways.  The Roadmap for America has gone nowhere, partially due to Ryan's complete lack of leadership, and his caving into things like the bailout.  He has passed one of the largest government boondoggles into our economy, and pushes to bailout out other failing companies, and then pretends like he's neither done nor said any of it and cheerleads his "Roadmap for America's Future".  The sad part is, many Republicans in the area help him cheerlead, because they are starved for anything that seems fiscally responsible, even if it's a cheap lie like Paul Ryan.  They ignore his large government sins, even while Ryan's roadmap falls on deaf ears.

As Todd Zywicki points out, Chapter 11 bankruptcy was almost tailor made for companies like GM.  Paul Ryan needs to make a choice.  If he truly believes in his Roadmap for America's Future, then he needs to act like it, grow a spine, and start voting against bills that run counter to that roadmap.  Cheerleading the roadmap, while voting for bills that doom it to failure is nothing short of a lie.