Skip to comments.The Paul Ryan speech that is sparking VP buzz
Posted on 04/04/2012 12:48:09 PM PDT by Hotlanta Mike
Paul Ryan took the stage last night in Wisconsin to introduce Mitt Romney and thank supporters ahead of his victory speech. Conservatives reacted favorably, sparking speculation that the speech was a trial balloon for Ryan as a Vice President candidate for Romney.
Ryan challenged Obama for his "broken promises" reminding voters that he would try to divide Americans because he could not run on his record.
"I seem to remember him saying that he was going to be a uniter, not a divider," Ryan said. "Frankly this is one and the worst of his broken promises. We do not need a campaigner-in-chief, we need a commander-in-chief we need a leader that America deserves."
"The presidency is bigger than this. He was supposed to be bigger than this." Ryan continued, "We need solutions, not excuses. We need a president who takes the lead in not one that spreads the blame. We need someone who appeals to our dreams and aspirations, not to our fears and anxieties. We as Americans deserved to choose what kind of country we want and what kind of people we want to be."
Video at link
(Excerpt) Read more at campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com ...
I would be thrilled with Ryan as VP. Absolutely thrilled.
I’m already crushed that Ryan was utterly devoid of principles to endorse Romney. His stock plummeted in my estimation.
Imagine Ryan in a debate with Plugs.
That would be like Einstein debating my shoe.
So would I be thrilled.
He is combative and well spoken.
forget ryan, he is a nobody. It should be vetted Sarah Palin, without any question.
“They don’t have the clout “
No, they needed about 40 more conservative/ Tea Party Representatives in the House.
Some of the worst spending bills passed the House with more Dem votes than GOP.
We just missed having the clout.
40 more votes is about all we need this time.
Ryan as VP would really upset those who will never vote for the GOP candidate regardless of the office being voted on... I like it!
We could do a lot worse. I like this possibility. I’m not thrilled, but then there’s not much to be thrilled about this time around, except for the idea of voting out 0bama.
Getting 40 more tea party votes in the House is not having "just missed". It is missing by a wide margin.
The majority of Americans are not tea partiers, and do not agree with the economic conservatism of Paul Ryan. What that means is that, to the extent we want to move this country to the right, we have to use guile, and coalition building issue by issue. The same tools the left used to get us in this mess in the first place.
That is certainly not the preferred route, and contains its own potential pitfalls and missteps. But the sooner we recognize it is the only strategy that has a politically realistic chance of succeeding, the sooner we can get started.
He sold out for same VP promise that Romney made to McDonnell, Paul, DeMint, etc., and I doubt he got it in writing.
Paul Ryan has made a political decision to support Romney. All political decisions are compromises. Ryan had four choices and he picked one. It is irrational and preposterous to assert that this choice shows Ryan to be "utterly devoid of principles". The overwhelming likelihood at this point is that Romney will be the nominee. If and when that occurs, will those who choose Romney over Obama also be "utterly devoid of principles"?
That's true if the TP freshman return to their roots. That would mean a conservative as Speaker, not Boehner or Cantor.
I wonder if Michael Burgess or Allen West wants the job?
It is just plain stupid to call Paul Ryan "a nobody".
paul ryan is a nobody.
t will be pure pleasure to see both parties take Obama down.
Paul Ryan has not sold out to anyone. He is a good, strong Conservative who loves his country, but more importantly, has the courage to stand up and do something about it.
Paul’s fiscal genius for a Politician this young, is nothing short of amazing. He is smart enough to realize that this country is in dire trouble, so he has the intelligence to do what he has to, in order to have an influence in what he believes in most.
His positive, “DO SOMETHING” attitude and approach should be admired, not denigrated. We need more of his kind taking charge and they deserve our full support and respect.
I would be pleased to vote for a Santorum/Ryan or Gingrich/Ryan ticket. Ryan and anyone else conservative would get consideration. Ryan and Romney or Paul... phhht.
I think Mittens ‘ll pick someone from the south where he is weak..maybe hispanic too.. to soften his image as a white, out of touch rich guy.
It is hard to believe that any part of your comments would be something I could agree with. If Paul Ryan were running for the nomination, he would have had my support over any of the four remaining. His attitude does deserve respect, but not on a doomed to failure Romney ticket. That would likely preclude him from running later.
He will one day, be the President of the USA. And he is also smart enough to use Caps where they are appropriate.
Ryan belongs in the House (as House Majority Leader). Rubio needs to stay in the Senate.
The VP needs to not unbalance the ticket like it did last time (where the VP candidate overshadows the Presidential candidate).
I’m a big fan of Paul Ryan, but I’ve given up on supporting anyone for any public office.
Everyone considered for Pres or VP is inevitably uncovered to be either:
1) A RINO sellout; or
2) Of dubious Constitutional eligibility; or
That’s your biggest problem. You place too many limitations on details, that are the very least of what we need to worry about at the moment.
Sometimes I wonder if these people here constantly knocking Romney are just pushing Obama, it is a little over the top.
Talk about Obama being a cry baby ha ha ha
"Palin has one repetitious fault, where she refuses to listen to what people advise her to do or not do....She did the same thing a mayor, Governor, etc. She does things her way, without taking valid advice or criticism well. It's why she quit as governor and it is how she is running Sarah PAC, as well as her ridiculous campaign."
He does not have the political savvy to get big things done. Greta had him swinging his head back n forth one night trying to make sense of his budget. He couldn’t even answer all of the questions and kept coming back to working with the Speaker. Don’t worry, if Mitt wants him, he’ll be Mitts because Paul is the shadow lately. We are still in trouble because many voters will not like Romney no matter who he picks for VP.
Do I get a free sub if I vote for him? I hope entitlement reform doesn’t mean the end of free subs. I’ll stick with Rick. He throws a mean curve on the lane.
“It is irrational and preposterous to assert that this choice shows Ryan to be “utterly devoid of principles”.”
Hardly. Ryan, like many of these 11th hour “endorsers” could have endorsed someone early when it mattered, someone whom they agreed with politically.
Or he could have waited until it no longer really matters, and give the front-runner his support.
That’s the act of an unprincipled schemer. Just like Romney.
I agree, but Ryan is exceptionally eloquent at explaining the problems facing us. He would be a worthy choice in my opinion.
Ryan is a lightweight and a tax-sucking RINO. He has no principles when it comes to holding the line on spending. Keep him out of the VP sweepstakes.
I think that Paul Ryan likely looked at the facts on the ground as of a week ago or so and concluded that Romney would almost certainly be the eventual nominee and that by endorsing Romney ahead of the Wisconsin primary, he (Ryan) would be helping bring the primary process to a close and get the general election campaign started.
This is a political decision and it involves judgement and compromise, but to say that this decision shows Ryan to be utterly unprincipled is nonsense.
Oh, I agree completely. I'm referring to those conservatives who are quick to ditch any politician, including Ryan, if they do one thing that isn't ideologically pure. In Ryan's case, supporting Romney.
Those people are committing the same strategic flaw Hitler did on the Eastern Front. A rigid, unreasonable order to hold the line, never retreat tactically even if it gives you a strategic advantage, etc.. And that is a losing strategy.
If there are politicians whom we trust in general to try to move this country in the right direction, we've got to allow them some tactical political flexibility as to how to achieve that. "No retreat, constant attack" is a recipe for failure, because your enemies will figure that out, lure you into untenable positions, and obliterate you.
For example, Obama is making huge political mileage out of the supposed "subsidies" given to oil and gas companies. It's a ridiculous argument, and the amounts at issue are tiny. So now is the time when the GOP should call his bluff. Bohener and McConnell should make a joint statement: "These aren't subsidies. It is the same kind of tax treatment other American companies receive, such as not being forced to pay taxes twice, both overseas and here, on money earned overseas. Eliminating these provisions will further increase oil and gas prices, and hurt domestic supplies. But if you're going to lie to the American people about that to score political points for reelection, fine. We'll give it to you, and see if you're willing to put your signature where your rhetoric is. But the American people should know ahead of time that those higher prices and shorter supplies will be on your head. So here's your bill if you want to sign it."
It would turn the politics of the issue around completely, and hurt him. And we're only talking a few billion anyway, so it won't actually cripple the industry. But the political benefits in November, after a summer of ridiculously high prices, may be enormous.