Jonathan Chait wrote about it in The New York Magazine blog this week and I'll put it up on the screen, which goes to whether you really want to expand the base of the party and reach out to the poor. This is what he writes.

Obama is arguing that misfortune can strike Americans in all forms — a disability, a storm, illness, or merely outliving our savings — and we have some obligation to each other. Ryan's budget imposes savage cuts to food stamps, children's health insurance, and other mitigations of suffering for the least fortunate. Oh, and Ryan also voted against relief for victims of Hurricane Sandy. By Ryan's definition, if the government is rebuilding your destroyed home, you're a taker, too.

RYAN: No, look. This is a straw man argument. The President said I think the week earlier that we had suspicions about Medicare and taking care of the elderly and feeding poor children. When he sets up these straw men, which is to affix views to his adversaries that they don't have to win the argument by default, it's not really an honest debate.

Gregory then tried to get him to specifically say which part of the "safety net culture" was doing that and par for the course, Ryan didn't answer him. If Gregory was going to quote an article by Chait, it's too bad he didn't bring this one up, because it does a great job of calling out Ryan for the "weasel words" like the ones he was using in the segment above: Paul Ryan Breaks Down Under Wonkterrogation.

It's also too bad he didn't show part of Jon Stewart's segment last week where he tore him up for his hypocrisy as well, but it's David Gregory, so I tend to keep my expectations pretty low.