Skip to comments.Paul Ryan to 'values voters': If Obama wins, there's no going back
Posted on 09/14/2012 12:56:43 PM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Speaking at the one of the largest annual gatherings for social conservatives Friday, Paul Ryan's message was a punch to the gut: If you allow President Obama to be reelected, theres no going back.
If we renew the contract, we will get the same deal with only one difference. In a second term, he will never answer to you again, Congressman Ryan said at the Values Voter Summit in Washington, D.C., on Friday. In so many ways, starting with Obamacare, reelecting this president would set in motion things that can never be called back. It would be a choice to give up so many other choices.
Ryans speech three parts critique of Mr. Obamas record on issues of faith, foreign affairs, and finances and one part testimonial to presidential contender Mitt Romneys character was not just the usual stump speech. It was a pointed appeal to a key element of the GOP base that will have to turn out in force if the Romney-Ryan ticket is to prevail on Nov. 6.
Ryan, Mr. Romneys vice presidential running mate and a Republican congressman from Wisconsin, spoke to a packed auditorium of some 2,000 attendees, plus a handful of hecklers. The summit is a conclave supported by leading Washington social conservative groups and organized by the Family Research Council.
....On the seven occasions Ive been sworn in as a member of Congress, I have never taken an oath to the government.....The oath that all of us take is to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, under which government is limited and the people are sovereign.
That moment clicked for Mary Anne Krupa of Chicago. He articulated what people in government work for and about so well, said Ms. Krupa,...I understood why Romney picked him.
(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...
If 0bama wins, the economic crash is probably less than 6 months away,
and it will be seen as an excuse to implement full on communism.
Seems to me that Ryan was preaching to the choir on this subject. These are the conservative of the conservative that attend the Values Voter Summit, and virtually no one there is voting for Obama.
This was an excellent, excellent speech.
But they have to be motivated to go out and vote, not just sit home.
Two hecklers who were given the bum's rush were undoubtedly in the Bamster's camp.
If Romney can win this one and not screw up for 8 years, you might get your wish.
Hopefully, it won’t be too late.
look at Rat states...Washington...California...they keep the same party in the governorships forever....
Love it! Hope he takes this message to every single state he campaigns in. Also hope it makes an ad at some point. Totally true!
Ryan speaks clearly and consistently ties specific issues to overriding principles. In constrast, Romney often waffles. The best thing (the very best thing) I can say about Romney is that he chose Ryan.
This is essentially the same argument used by ABOs: “Not supporting Romney is Supporting Obama.”
In this case, though, it is in the context of “values”, a part of Ryan’s speech being about values, and this being at a value’s voter summit.
Unfortunately, the article doesn’t get into the arguments put forth by those who peruse Romney’s record and become convinced that he is a radical liberal on values. One man, not Ryan, mentioned the military and “don’t ask don’t tell”, but didn’t mention that Mitt Romney, in one of the repub primary debates, was accepting of gays serving openly in our armed forces.
Life, homosexualism, gun control, romney-care, revenue enhancements....all of those are the concerns of those of us who have not bought into Mitt Romney. At the same time, an honest principled conservative must admit that Romney is better on Israel and on foreign policy in general. I can also see that he has more experience at bring bankruptcies back to solvency.
So, on the values concerns that build and maintain a strong America, Romney simply is bad on. However, on a few other issues of concern to me, he is much better. No one can have watched the duplicity of the liberals in government and media on Egypt and Libya, Obama’s initiative, and not been sick for our country.
While Romney cannot get my vote, that doesn’t mean that he should be my primary target.
My conclusion is that I must attack Obama with everything at my disposal. Obama deserves my nuclear arsenal for now. Romney deserves artillery and small arms fire.
Yes, but you go to war with the army you have, not the army you wish you had. If RR wins in Nov Conservatives work has just started, not ended.
With us all playing a role to oust Obama-Biden, we will.
True that! The damage caused by four more years of this gay, Christian hating, abortion promoting president will be irreversible, especially if he gets a like-minded Congress. The tide of cultural decay needs to break against a solid wall, from the White House, the Senate, the House, and the Supreme Court. While we are at it, we need conservative state houses and governors pushing it back.
Yes but Romney needs to build a bridge to them. That is why Ryan was sent. Elections are won by coalitions of voters. You have to build that coalition and Value Voters have shown they will not show up on Election day if you do not court them.
I’m hoping that will be in our future.
” - - - the GOP base that will have to turn out in force if the Romney-Ryan ticket is to prevail on Nov. 6.”
To Ryan: If you want our support, then STOP saying that you are going to replace, or “save” parts of Obama”care!”
Either state that you and Romney will repeal and ABOLISH Obama”care” or get ready for us to boot you sorry RINOs out of the Republican Party by 2014.
Actually, I disagree. This is going to be a typical election: decided by turnout of respective bases. willard is already winning the mushy middle by a large margin. husseins part of the electorate is never going to vote for willard. That leaves conservatives who are wondering why they should show up to vote for a liberal with an R after his name.
Paul Ryan is doing what he was brought on to do: bring the conservative base back onboard.
Romney concerns all of us, but 0bama concerns us way more.
As much as I dislike Romney, I will vote for him and Paul Ryan (a future President).
Minor adjustment: Paul Ryan is TRYING TO DO
doing what he was brought on to do: bring the conservative base back onboard.
Romney won't get my vote, but Obama will get my ire.
While I won’t vote for Romney, I’ll attack him only when he says anything stupid in the area of social issues.
Obama will get 24/7 bombardment.
iow you are voting for Obama by inaction (good men doing nothing), or by casting in with a sacrificial party (ala an anode)
if 0bama gets another term, there is a chance you won’t be able to vote again at all.
Sorry, I just have a problem with “not voting for Romney” crowd.
I’ve rejected your argument long ago. This is about not being able to support a man who is in direct opposition to my cherished values.
It is possible to conduct a 2-front war in which one of the enemies gets first attention. Iraq/Afghanistan was such a war.
But, just because we destroyed Iraq first doesn’t mean that we gave Mullah Omar a general-ship in the American army. He was, after all, still an enemy.
Thank you, Cincinatus’ Wife, for the post!
We have to get Zero out of office, even if it means voting for Romney!
A vote for a third party “true conservative” candidate, or sitting at home on election day, is colluding with the enemy. Seriously.
Better a RINO in the White House than a non-American anti-American!
(Retired USAF Master Sergeant and SOCOM aircrew)
I’ve already rejected that argument, so I’m at the point where I just don’t hear the objection any more.
I’m sure it will all work out and our freedoms will remain in tact.
Obama submits to Brotherhood, asks for suppression of anti-Islam video
Obama can’t surprise me any more. Tell me he offed his own momma, and I’d say, “doesn’t surprise me”.
” - - - It is possible to conduct a 2-front war - - - “
I agree, in war and in politics.
What we have here is: 1.) a War to rid our Nation of the counterculture, Communist Obama;
and 2.) a battle to rid the Republican Party of the Bipartisan Cave-In elected politicians that are Republicans In Name Only.
The War to convincingly defeat Obama is compromised whenever the RINO politicians start to Cave-In to Obama BEFORE the voters have a chance to vote Obama out.
The old McCain Days of passing out ‘hold-your-nose-when-you-vote-for-a-RINO’ noseclamps are over, but Romney refuses to believe it.
Romney is totally clueless as a politician and the polls reflect that fact.
If Romney wants to win by a large margin, then he must convince the voters that there is a large difference between him and Obama.
Obama is a Communist through and through. Obama wants to continue to take the US Federal Government on the Communist historically proven track of failure.
Romney must show the voters that he, Romney, is VERY different from Obama.
If Romney cant do that then Obama will keep on the Communist wrong track, and we lose the War to the Obama Communists.
If Romney can do that, then we win the War against the Obama Communists. Then, after Romneys election victory, we will continue the battle to hold the RINOs accountable for their actions, in-actions, and cave-ins.
I am of the opinion that Romney will lose the War to Obama UNLESS he shows a greater difference between himself and Obama. Thus, I choose to call out Romney whenever he shows his Socialist inclinations, such as his stated goal of saving parts of Obamacare.
IOW, I have chosen to fight the battle with RINO Romney in the firm belief that unless he rejects his Obama-lite ideas, he will lose the War to Obama by a razor thin margin.
To Romney: To win big there must be a big difference. Tick-Tock.
To those FReepers who find fault with my opinion, let me ask you this question: Why is there a statistical tie in the Polls between Obama and Romney at this late date if there is a big difference between the two candidates?
excellent post, Graewoulf
Aw, - - - shucks - - - . Thanks.
Because half of the American population is actually American and half of the population is either deceived or insanely liberal.
Even if you’re going to assume that Romney and Obama are identical on domestic issues, the question arises on whether they’re identical on foreign issues. I think that Romney has shown over the last few days that he is head, shoulders, chest, hips, legs, feet, soles, and about ten more yards above Obama in regards to foreign policy. At least Romney doesn’t wear kneepads when dealing with the Middle East.
I would vote R/R on that alone.
I think he’s being successful for the most part. I question if it’ll be enough. Saw an interesting poll out of MO a few weeks back. It showed that those who identified as d were going to vote for hussein by some margin line the mid 90th percentile. For those who identified with the r’s it was in the 80s for willard.
Ryan said in his speech that they intend to repeal ALL of Obamacare if I’m recalling correctly.
Yep, he's not made the sale to hardcases like the 2 of us.
He can't do it for me unless somehow I become convinced that he actually is pro-life despite everything he's ever done, and despite his recent approval of abortion for the health of the mother.
He was preaching to the grumblers, half-hearted back-handed types, and the ABRs in the conservative movement.
There aren’t many, but some of them are right here on FR.
Words of wisdom to contemplate. Re-elect Obama and you can basically kills social conservatism goodbye for all time - gay marriage and the outlawing of behavior that defies it (like eliminating adoption agencies that only serve man-woman married couples), taxpayer funded abortions, affirmative action for LGBTs, you name it, it will be ‘game over - you lost’ for the conservative movement.
It’s that serious. The Democrats have opened the Kimono, they are more extreme than ever. We lose now, we lose forever.
“If we renew the contract, we will get the same deal with only one difference. In a second term, he will never answer to you again, Congressman Ryan said at the Values Voter Summit in Washington, D.C., on Friday. In so many ways, starting with Obamacare, reelecting this president would set in motion things that can never be called back. It would be a choice to give up so many other choices. “
Maybe I’m just young and stupid, but why exactly is ‘health of the mother’ such a huge hurdle to jump?
you think a baby should be killed because some lady has a cold or a stuffy nose?
You realize, of course, that in the pro-life cause there is a huge difference for years between “health of mother” and “life of mother”, don’t you?
Dude, I’m pro-life too. I’m just relatively young, so I’m not exactly up to date on the jargon.
What evidence is there that when Romney says ‘health,’ he means anything but a grave or disfiguring illness? Has he ever specified that he intends a difference between ‘life’ and ‘health’? Because until today, I’ve not been at all aware of such things.
Romney is an old warrior. He knows the jargon. He knows the discussions. He knows exactly what he said.
BTW, I appreciate your honor in not blasting me after I assumed you were read into this more than you were. Forgive me for my not giving you the benefit of the doubt. I’m sorry.
No worries. I know that things can get kind of inflamed when we’re passionate about matters. I do my best to remain calm, but sometimes things get out of hand.
And I’ll take your word for what he meant, then, at least for the sake of argument. I’m not at all happy about that, whether he means it or whether he’s just waffling, but I think I’ve got to take what I see as the pragmatic approach. Even if we assume the worst about Romney, Obama is even worse than that (as you mentioned in earlier posts), and he’ll be far more amenable to conservative and pro-life pressure than Obama will.
Of course, if he gets into office and shoves pro-abortion things forward, he can probably consider my vote lost.
You do realize of course that you are not in agreement with the pro-life organizations’ views on this:
Although Romney had made his position on abortion clear throughout the campaign opposing abortions except in cases of rape or incest and contrasting that with President Barack Obamas position supporting 100% of all abortions throughout pregnancy for any reason some pro-life voters wrongly assumed Romney had changed his position.
However, Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, tells conservative radio talk show host Bryan Fischer that she confirmed with the Romney campaign that the candidate did not meant to say health and that his pro-life views remain the same.
If that were his position, he would never have received our endorsement, thats for sure, Dannenfelser told the American Family Radio host. I have heard clarification from his spokesperson, restating what his position really is, which is rape, incest, life of the mother. That is his position. Those are his exceptions.
Governor Romney has made it clear that he is the pro-life candidate in this race which is why the SBA List Board of Directors voted unanimously to stand behind him in April. It is the responsibility of all pro-life voters to now unite behind Governor Romney. Together we can put a pro-life leader in the White House, Dannenfelser said.
“And Ill take your word for what he meant, then, at least for the sake of argument. “
You shouldnt. see #46.
Yeah. And then there's all the other stuff Romney does.
I'm sure Ryan believes what he is saying. It would be nice to think he could say the same about his handlers and his lead candidate. I don't think Ryan can deliver them.
We're all on our own. Each person must do as he thinks best, according to the circumstances in his State.
The Republican leadership, counseled by Karl Rove, have chosen with great determination a very weak candidate -- Donna Brazile, a giant 'Rat, told the rest of the ABC News crew on their Sunday-morning show six months ago, that Romney was, and is, the weakest GOP candidate of all, and that every time Romney won, Obama's Armies of the Night rejoiced.