Monday, August 13, 2012

Romney Just Did What Reagan Should Have Done and Nominated a Jack Kemp for VP

I'll admit I haven't always been Paul Ryan's biggest fan as you can tell by a previous post of mine titled "Paul Ryan is Overrated and his Budget Plan Sucks" which incidentally is getting quite a bit of traffic now that he is the VP pick (I seem to have trashed the entire current GOP ticket).  And I stand by my criticisms of him.  I think many on the right are just so in love with Paul Ryan that they aren't looking at his plans critically, especially the tax reform section of his budget plan which could easily increase taxes on a lot of middle class Americans thanks to its planned elimination of deductions.  Also, in 2011 his ACU rating was only 80, thanks to a couple of pro-Union votes and votes for big spending bills.

But putting all that aside, I do think he is a great pick by Romney for VP. I'm actually quite surprised he picked Ryan as Ryan clearly overshadows him.  He's young, energetic, very well spoken and clearly a leader in the GOP.  Many, in fact, had been pressuring him to run for President himself.  Romney's pick of Ryan is clearly a testament of him putting the country first as well as his business acumen.  In the private sector, you want to hire the most talented people available as that increases your profit.  In politics, you seem to more often be looking to check boxes.

So how do I reconcile my earlier criticism of Ryan with my stance that he is a great pick?  Here are some reasons:

  • My earlier criticisms sprouted from everyone gushing over his budget plan, so I thought I'd point out some very specific imperfections within the plan and within Ryan's record.  But we don't live in a perfect world and nobody who Romney was going to pick was going to be 100% conservative/libertarian.  He was never going to pick a Jim DeMint or a Rand Paul to be his VP but Ryan was one of the better choices.  If Romney had picked someone like Rob Portman, I'd be shaking my head today.  Portman is essentially a Bush Republican who doesn't stand for much.  Ryan, on the other hand, definitely stands for a lot.  He stands for the America that we used to have, an America that can come back under the right leadership.
  • If you look at Ryan's lifetime ACU rating of 91.69, he compares quite favorably to people we think of as stalwart conservatives.  Newt had a lifetime rating of 90, Dick Cheney had a 91 and Jack Kemp had an 89.  That's pretty good company, I'd say and as he has been in Congress for 14 years, you can't say there aren't enough datapoints to reach a conclusion.
  • Looking at the big picture, picking Ryan is the same as if Reagan had picked Jack Kemp in 1980, who was also a relatively youthful and charismatic House reformer who was the darling of conservatives.  Back then though Reagan felt he need to balance the ticket with someone from the establishment with a long record and chose George H.W. Bush.  This one pick gave control of the GOP to the Bush family for 20 years following Reagan's departure from office as being the VP automatically gives you an advantage when running for President (especially if that Presidency is successful).  This pick has the potential to give the GOP to the reformers for years to come.  People who won't shirk from tackling Medicare despite the fact that its considered a "third rail" in politics.  These are the people we need to have in power in order to keep America from sliding further towards bankruptcy.  Not thinking to the future is definitely one of the problems I had with W.  I'm a huge Dick Cheney fan but it was pretty clear due to his health that he wouldn't be President.  Not having someone waiting in the wings for two terms meant that we had to settle for a John McCain in 2008.
I also just want to add one more thing, I'm relatively impressed with how Romney has been campaigning for President.  I expected that once his challengers dropped out that he would immediately tack towards the left (I really thought he'd be the etch-a-sketch candidate), which is something even Reagan did in 1980.  But he hasn't really, he is campaigning as a conservative and doubled down on that by picking Paul Ryan as his VP.  While he isn't a bomb thrower like Newt, the main substance of his speeches are probably no different than what a Newt would say if he were in the same position.  He is offering a real choice for voters and driving Democrats nuts. 

What else could I want?

Cross posted from libertarian neocon's blog.


I mentioned to someone on the phone
that before Romney picked Ryan, I took Romney's campaigning rhetoric as just
stuff he was saying to get my vote... I did not trust him. With his pick of
Ryan I look back and think that maybe he actually meant what he said. While there
are other tickets I could dream about, I can say that I do like a Romney/Ryan
ticket. I can support that.

That's a thought Steve but remember two things. First, Ryan doesn't have any authority to make policy. Second, as has been his history, he has already backed off his plan to dilute it in favor of Romney's. Ryan - while a smart and nice guy - is no "true" conservative having voted for TARP, Stimulus '08, the Auto Bailout, No Child Left Behind, ALL of the Highway Bill pork-fests and wouldn't stand with the TEA party on many races or during the budget ceiling show down.

That being said, IF they truly are nominated in Tampa (Ron Paul's delegates won a HUGE victory last week), we will have to fight tooth and nail to avoid making it a repeat of the Bush years with uncontrolled spending and big talk but no real soul to change the system.

Yes, I do not want a repeat of the Bush
years either. With the intelligent information resources we have now, it will
be much harder for the media to get away with either giving a pass or slanting
the facts. I am much more politically engaged this time around and I am glad
there are more resources for me to use. I like reading your articles for the
content you give and the resources you cite for my own validation (trust, but

Both Romney and Ryan would do well to seek and act on the wisdom and counsel of Newt Gingrich. Romney is an opportunist of the worst sort, and both he and Ryan are tied to and trying to please the Bushes. The Bushes are Fabian socialists, 'wolves in sheep's clothing.' In 1933, Senator Prescott Bush (GHW Bush's father and GWB's grandfather) and a group of industrialists and financiers planned a coup to take over the USA and install a national socialist government (NAZI). Prescott was an ally of Hitler and helped hide his resources.

This branch of the Republicans are NOT conservative socially, politically, morally or fiscally. Romney is whatever happens to be politically expedient at the time to gain himself power or profit and he's using Newt's ideas and language, because they are popular and what is needed right now. Ryan has already used some of Newt's ideas in revisions of his budget plan and that has improved them.

Newt is the man with the intellect and ideas. For this country's sake, they had better listen and do what he says.

Politijim, 'Tack' is a good word to use in regard to the MO of the RINO/CINO segment of the Republican party. A sailboat 'tacks' to go against the prevailing winds, and looks like it is changing course, when it is really going toward a certain point. As I wrote in the previous post, the Bushes are really still in charge right now and their goal is not conservatism, but socialism. There are also communists and Islamists infiltrating the political, academic, education and business sectors as well as the military.

Conservatives have been lazy, lax, asleep too long.
We need to recognize what is really happening. A short 'tack' back to the 'right' does NOT mean Romney is sincerely conservative...when all his prior career was more radical than Ted Kennedy and his governorship was the model for Obama's administration and policies.

Remember also, George Soros and his nasty billions are at work trying to destroy the USA, morally, economically and politically. Soros has said, 'Romney or Obama? There is little difference between the two.'
I've done my homework on this. Romney's billions were made at taxpayer expense. Romney's sons are closely associated with Corzine and Madoff-like figures in the financial world. The Romneys are shady people.
In a sane world, Soros, Obama and Romney would be in jail.

Post a Comment


Twitter Delicious Facebook Digg Stumbleupon Favorites More