Paul Ryan speaks in central Florida (Live Streaming)

WESH ^ | 8/18/2012 | WESH

[CatherineofAragon]

Who do you want to unite with? Liberals? No thanks.

[Longbow1969]

If its a slaughter like we hope there will be no need to even discuss reaching across the aisle.

Wrong. That was part of the genius of the Ryan choice. He's a happy warrior. That's what people gravitate too. People want to hear that their leaders are going to try to work together and get along. Even if we win in a landslide our team will have to keep saying stuff like that. Yes, you and I think it's ridiculous blather. It is. Unfortunately, most people are not political partisans like us and folks on political forums. The average ignorant citizen likes this kind of "let's get along" happy talk. The key is, we need to make sure our representatives and leaders don't start believing this stuff. GW Bush, for example, all too often did.

[loveliberty2]

Ryan repeated the most important principle which distinguishes the ideas underlying American liberty from those of so-called "progressives" who promote a counterfeit idea of "government-over-people."

Summarized years ago, in a book celebrating our Constitution's 200th Anniversary, the following message summarizes Ryan's point well, and could be used in conjunction with his amazing campaign statement:

Our Constitution embodied a UNIQUE IDEA. Nothing like it had ever been done before. The power of the idea was in the recognition that people's rights are granted directly by the Creator - not by the state - and that the people, then, and only then, grant rights to government. The concept is so simple, yet so very fundamental and far-reaching.

CREATOR

People

Government

America's founders embraced a previously unheard-of political philosophy which held that people are "...endowed BY THEIR CREATOR with certain unalienable rights.." This was the statement of guiding principle for the new nation, and, as such, had to be translated into a concrete charter for government. The Constitution of The United States of America became that charter.

Other forms of government, past and present, rely on the state as the grantor of human rights. America's founders, however, believed that a government made up of imperfect people exercising power over other people should possess limited powers. Through their Constitution, they wished to "secure the blessings of liberty" for themselves and for posterity by limiting the powers of government. Through it, they delegated to government only those rights they wanted it to have, holding to themselves all powers not delegated by the Constitution. They even provided the means for controlling those powers they had granted to government.

This was the unique American idea. Many problems we face today result from a departure from this basic con­cept. Gradually, other "ideas" have influenced legislation which has reversed the roles and given government greater and greater power over individuals. Early generations of Americans pledged their lives to the cause of in­dividual freedom and limited government and warned, over and over again, that eternal vigilance would be required to preserve that freedom for posterity.

---

Footnote: "Our Ageless Constitution," W. David Stedman & La Vaughn G. Lewis, Editors (Asheboro, NC, W. David Stedman Associates, 1987) Part III:  ISBN 0-937047-01-5

[loveliberty2]

Thanks for your observations. See my post on one of Ryan's key points which is likely to strike a chord with seniors who were more likely to have been exposed to America's founding philosophy in their schools.

It is that idea for which so many have given their last measure of devotion!!!

“The same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe, the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God.” (John F. Kennedy - 1961 Inaugural)

[bert]

-——MOM...YOU DID BUILD THAT!”——

That was much more than just a punch. That was a debilitating blow.

The counter punch is she went back to school but that effort will land on a glove and be ineffective. In fact by including the line, Ryan was inviting the ineffective, easily deflected punch.

[Starboard]

“It’s sort of like the majority of voters want A) less spending, and B) no actual spending cuts to almost any program.”

---

Not surprising since that’s the way it is for many people’s personal lives. They may want to spend less and save more, but they just can’t give up their old spending habits.

It’s going to be a real challenge for Romney/Ryan to cut or scale back on government spending. But, they can make a good case for eliminating a lot of programs where waste and redundancy are obvious. And there’s an abundance of such examples, including several large federal agencies.

[bert]

His spark is not fading, there was no hint of fade. He had on his deadly serious game face. He is intent on killing his opposition. That seriousness is not reflected in a standard stump oratory.

To kill, to draw debilitating, strength draining blood, one must be dead serious in the Presidential election underway.

Inept, know it all conservatives bitch about everything and must not be considered rational nor relevant

[rodguy911]

great post! I think if you want to boil it all down American people are yearning for a new administration. One that has more of the values and looks more Presidential acts like a president actually knows what to do. The ozero regime has been a disaster. The guy is a nothing. He couldn’t run the office if he had to and has made all the wrong moves for the country. People are not stupid. They will and already have realized that.I think we are looking at a landslide for our side.

[rodguy911]

There are two questions you should ask yourself:

1. Can the country stand another four years of these clowns?

2. Who will you vote for?

Answer them in all sincerity and then decide whether you want to sit this one out and take cheap shots from the sidelines or do what Freepers do best and motivate others who don't have even 10% of the knowledge we do.

[TornadoAlley3]

Jan. 2012

excerpts-

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2012-01-08/news/fl-older-florida-voters-20120108-17_1_mitt-romney-senior-citizens-iowa-results

“Looks like the older voters are leaning toward Romney,” said Susan MacManus, a political scientist at the University of South Florida and author of “Targeting Senior Voters.”

She said some elderly Republicans are buzzing about Romney's TV ad claiming that he's “a man of steadiness and constancy.” In the ad, which began running in Florida last week, Romney says: “I've been married to the same woman for 25 — excuse me, I'll get in trouble — for 42 years. I've been in the same church my entire life. I worked at one company, Bain, for 25 years.”

Many older voters can relate to that message, MacManus said, because they too remained loyal to the same company through their careers and tend to frown on those who jump from marriage to marriage. She said older Republicans, especially military veterans, also relate to Romney's ad message that he “will never apologize for the United States of America.”

A senior backlash to the health-care law helped Republicans win all six of the closely contested congressional races in Florida in 2010.

A nationwide exit poll of voters that year found that 58 percent of those 65 and older wanted the law repealed. Some 59 percent of voters in that age group voted for Republicans for Congress.

[Longbow1969]

It’s going to be a real challenge for Romney/Ryan to cut or scale back on government spending. But, they can make a good case for eliminating a lot of programs where waste and redundancy are obvious. And there’s an abundance of such examples, including several large federal agencies.

I agree. I don't think they are likely to succeed at cutting much of anything to be honest. In the short term, my only expectations are that they are more business friendly, scale back on the regulatory state, and slow the growth of spending such that our economy gets off the ground. A growing economy alone will help cut down our deficits.

As far as actually cutting things. Honestly, I think these entitlements may need to implode before we really do anything about it. The public may just need to learn the hard way. I'm hoping Europe's implosion will be a lesson, but I am just not sure even that is going to be enough. I just don't think a majority of the American public, such that it exists these days, is capable of accepting real cuts. Just look at Greece. These people are flat bankrupt and taking handouts from the Germans, and STILL they protest every proposed spending cut. After all this supposed austerity, they are STILL slated to have a primary deficit in 2014. Italy, Spain, California, etc, etc, aren't far behind - and nor is the US as a whole.

What Romney/Ryan can do is slow the rate of our downward spiral. They can make our courts less bad than Obama would, and we are going to need those courts when things really go to hell in a handbasket. R/R can cut back on the regulatory state, open up for more drilling, etc. Maybe, just maybe, R/R can hold things together long enough that the American public will get to see Europe's social welfare state entirely implode and perhaps realize we need to take drastic steps to avert that here. I have very low expectations, so it won't take much for R/R to meet them.

[Starboard]

“Maybe, just maybe, R/R can hold things together long enough that the American public will get to see Europe’s social welfare state entirely implode and perhaps realize we need to take drastic steps to avert that here.”

---

Very well put. I too am hoping this is how things turn out. Unfortunately, arguments based on economic logic and history are not very convincing for many people, but watching Europe’s wrenching implosion play out might just wake up enough of them to get this country back onto a sound and sustainable footing.

[Artcore]

For anybody who missed it, C-Span just put up the video. About 35 minutes.

http://www.c-span.org/Events/VP-Candidate-Paul-Ryan-Speaks-to-Retirees-in-Florida/10737433225-1/

[CatherineofAragon]

Oh, please. Cheap shots? Objecting to reaching across the aisle to morally bankrupt, leftwing Communists is hardly a “cheap shot”. Haven’t we learned that doesn’t work?

We don’t need to engage in dramatics. We need to hold candidates’ feet to the fire and make sure they espouse conservative principles.

[Laura722]

I agree. My bet is a Romney/Ryan will be more conservative than Bush/Cheney.

[randita]

I heard a clip from a rally yesterday and his voice sounded hoarse. He may be trying to take it easy to prevent him from losing his voice altogether OR the hoarseness could be the result of a cold.

Either way, he should be back to full strength once he gets a little rest and has some attention by a physician.

[rodguy911]

Yeah I wouldn’t answer the question either....gets to the core too quickly doesn’t it.

[MNJohnnie]

Well your tag line betrays you. You would rather cling to your lofty notions of some mythical perfect political purity rather then live in the real world. You would rather spend your time complaining then actually do anything to move the conservative agenda forward.

So cling to your angry political irrelevancy, the rest of us are too busy saving the country to waste time on this absurd “Purity uber alles” dogma.

[MNJohnnie]

Anyone seriously interested in politics knows Ryan is a much better candidate. Ryan has all ready been thru the National media wringer. Palin was throw into the game with utterly no previous experience of dealing with the National media wolves. Ryan is much better prepared to deal with them then Palin was. Glad you love Palin, please don’t confuse your adoration for fact.

[MNJohnnie]

Yep, he is Palin2 but he has one massive advantage over Palin. Palin had no previous experience dealing with the National media before she was fed to the wolves. Ryan has all ready been through the national media wringer. He knows how to handle them.