I can't help but wonder how much of a Randian Ryan is. He speaks
glowlingly of "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Fountainhead." But Ayan
Rand, author of these tomes was athiestic, a believer in extramarital sex (which
she freely practiced with great aplomb), and an adovocate of dog-eat-dog
captialism. In his day William F Buckley wrote Rand out of the American
conservaitve movement of his time. So I repeat, is Ryan a Randian or a Catholic
believer (like Buckley)? He can't be both. I frankly think he is a punk
spreadsheet slinginf kid, not prepared for national office.
@Rational"That is unsustainable, and even those who think they'll
exit through death's door before the bill is due will be out in the cold
unless those programs are restructured NOW, and not just the rate of increase
curtailed, but the amount spent decreased."Then why make the
situation worse by increasing defense spending and giving massive tax cuts for
the rich? Americans are looking for shared sacrifice to take care of the deficit
issue. Tell me, what in the world, in Ryan's plan, do the wealthy give up?
Particularly when Ryan's plan would have lowered Romney's tax rate
from 13.9% to 0.86% by eliminating the capital gains tax. Romney would have had
2+ million more in 2010 income under the Ryan plan. What's he sacrificing?
@ Craig Clark "He's in the spotlight now and his programmatic proposals
for dismantling proven government initiatives are going to get a grueling
scrutiny they've been able to elude as improbable GOP think tank
ideas."Yes, government initiatives ARE proven. Proven to run up
$60 Trillion in debt and unfunded future obligations. Ryan's
ideas improbable? Current government programs have been
"implementable," but not sustainable, and we're on the hook for
$200,000 each man, woman and child. That is unsustainable, and even those who
think they'll exit through death's door before the bill is due will be
out in the cold unless those programs are restructured NOW, and not just the
rate of increase curtailed, but the amount spent decreased.
Think Sarah Palin! Republicans were estatic. Democrats said that she was the
worst possible selection. So what's new?When a presidental
candidate selects a vice-presidential running mate, one side says
"Great!" and the other side says "Terrible!" It's all a
game.One thing is certain. Ryan's budget will be morphed into
Romney's budget because the conservative base expects it regardless of what
Ryan or Romney say today. Romney cannot take a more moderate path without
antagonising the conservatives on the Far Right. And it is very difficult to
imagine Ryan being content to sit quietly in the back and not try to exercise
influence to obtain his most precious agenda.Anyone who thinks that
Ryan will be content to be a "nobody" in a beige administration must be
living in a vaccuum. Unfortunately, Ryan did not run for president this time
around, but he does want to eventually become president. This, alone, make his
political agenda significant going forward, and he will possibly work to
incorporate his ideas, unmodified, into a Romney administration. Surely, his
budget proposal did not die in Congress. It only lay dormant until he can give
it life again.
"You don't have to agree with Romney, but you can't call him an
empty suit. Famous for being famous? Hardly."Huh? Did Romney even pay for his education at BYU? The answer is NO. He was given
it, 4 free years, because of his father.Without Romney's father
and all his father's millions, it would be interesting to see where Mitt
would be today. Would he be living off the government? Working as a
teacher and worried about losing his job? Would he be upset at corporations
outsourcing jobs and CEOs taking golden parachutes? Would he be demanding for
the increase of taxes on the wealthy? Would he be cool with folks hiding their
money in Swiss bank accounts?Mitt without his father and all his
millions most likely isn't running for President today. Stats show, class
mobility is horrible here in the US. If he started poor he'd most likely
still be poor today. had Mitt been born into a family of joe
sixpacks, he'd be a joe sixpack today.
@Esquire: You don't have to agree with Romney, but you can't call him
an empty suit. Famous for being famous? Hardly. I shouldn't have to rehash
Romney's accomplishments in both private and public sector pursuits. You
can't deny that Romney has proven time and again that he's a
From atl134: "I'm not sure what is wrong with attacking Paul
Ryan's budget. Weren't conservatives saying they wanted a policy
debate?"They were crowing that they finally were going to have a
national debate between contrasting visions for America, then hastily began back
peddling on Ryan's earlier calls for making Medicare into a voucher
program. It's going to be interesting how they try to wiggle out of
explaining his words that on the record. Just watch. They'll try to their
proposal sound like something other than what it is.George Will is
going to have an exhausting two months ahead of him to stay out in front on this
one. Good time for him to do some columns on his passion for baseball.
I'm not sure what is wrong with attacking Paul Ryan's budget.
Weren't conservatives saying they wanted a policy debate?
Romney used to be for legal abortion and universal healthcare, Ryan approved all
of Bush's overspending.Conservatives are really going to vote
for them. Yes, they will because republicans do what they are told.
The comments follow the party line to attack the messenger because the message
is so well said as to be unarguable.
George Will, thank you for your voice of reason and truth!
It is what it is, george. What did you expect, the other guys to say all hail
ryan and we forfeit?
Even George Will these days is getting caught up in the fury of rhetorical
overkill as election day nears. Nice try, George, but you're at your best
when you're calm enough to appreciate the power of skillful effective
understatement.Paul Ryan has long had a free ride in the friendly
haven of fellow conservatives who share his anti-government philosophy.
He's in the spotlight now and his programmatic proposals for dismantling
proven government initiatives are going to get a grueling scrutiny they've
been able to elude as improbable GOP think tank ideas.
What's Mitt's real first name? "Richard"?
Joe Blow,Romney has the business experience and plenty of it. Ryan
has the Washington experience. When you put a team together you don't get
people who all play the same position.
I just did a google search on Ryan. I had not heard or nor thought of his
"private sector" experience.Looks to me that he has spent
his whole post education career in the public sector, and all of that in
politics.Personally, I think Ryan is a qualified, capable and
intelligent person. However, I am wondering why those on the right
have not been screaming about his lack of business experience. You know, that
crowd that screams, "he has never had a real job in his life" or he has
"never run anything" or he "never had to meet a payroll".Can someone explain why that is? Because, it clearly used to matter to
them.Help me out Mr Richards.
So Mitt walks on water, can be as negative as possible and no one can criticize
him, and he doesn't even have to have a position on any issues. Yep,
that's a really good choice. We finally have a Kardashian candidate for -
famous for being famous. The empty suit. And George Will laps it up. Maybe the
GOP is going to nominate Chauncy Gardiner.
If someone can provide affordable wind energy, organic foods, electric cars...I
can stand behind that. But when it comes to choosing a President who is more
concerned with his plan of taking away from people what they earn to give to
those who won't ("can't" is different) and a President who is
more concerned with making America the America it is supposed to be, I will
choose America. I don't want my kids suffering because we can't get a
job, they can't get a job, money is worthless and we are criticized if we
don't buy the too expensive electric car. Yes, things need to
change. But how can we make any changes if we are subjects of Obama and not
concerned, involved citizens of States?
Yes, I agree. Ryan is a reasonable pick and the dems would bash ANYONE he
picked.Is that a newsflash? (although, Palin was certainly an
exception)The opposition party will bash the other party. Who they
pick, what they say, what they wear, what they dont say. This is
unfortunately, what politicians do.And if you dont think that the
political garbage is similar on both sides, you have your head in the sand.Yes, the Dems skirt the truth in their ads. Just listen to Fox. They
will let you know.What they wont tell you is that the GOP does the
same, and at similar rates.So, please spare me the "look how
much THEY lie" comments unless you call our your own.
Flowery, beautifully angry prose aside, George Will has truly lost objectivity.
Barack Obama may indulge in negative campaigning and should be called on it when
he does, but Will and the nation's conservative voices have been doing
nothing but using "smarmy" tactics since the day he was elected, and you
can guarantee the Romney campaign will hop right on board. It's already
happening in the stump speeches. I would love to see George Will question the
large government spending that Ryan voted for over the course of his
all-government no-private-sector career, but that would be inconvenient for him.
George Will speculates that the Obama can't run on his record
and so will smear Ryan as an "extremist" when he and the nation's
conservatives have done nothing but label Obama as an extreme socialist.
Conservatives certainly have no record worth running on. And then to use a MLK
Jr. quote to justify an extreme political position as if it had the validity of
the Civil Rights movement or Jesus's mission on earth. Mr.
Will, your hypocrisy is disgusting, regardless of the kingly speech you wrap it
It is always interesting to read about how the government shouldn't be
picking winner and losers and it is also interesting that it is usually
republicans who make that statement but they are picking winners and losers
themselves.Locally, the governor hands out tax credits left and
right to businesses but not to others. Nationally, energy companies get special
tax treatment or are not required to fully account dollar wise for the pollution