Skip to comments.Why Not Paul Ryan? (WSJ Editorial 2 days ago)
Posted on 08/10/2012 10:21:35 PM PDT by jb729
The whispering over Mitt Romney's choice of a running mate is getting louder, and along with it we are being treated to the sotto voce angst of the GOP establishment: Whatever else Mitt does, he wouldn't dare pick Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan, would he?
Too risky, goes the Beltway chorus. His selection would make Medicare and the House budget the issue, not the economy. The 42-year-old is too young, too wonky, too, you know, serious. Beneath it all you can hear the murmurs of the ultimate Washington insultthat Mr. Ryan is too dangerous because he thinks politics is about things that matter. That dude really believes in something, and we certainly can't have that.
All of which highly recommend him for the job.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
As for Medicare, the Democrats would make Mr. Ryan's budget a target, but then they are already doing it anyway. Mr. Romney has already endorsed a modified version of Mr. Ryan's premium-support Medicare reform, and who better to defend it than the author himself?
Republicans are likely to do worse if they merely play defense on Medicare and other entitlements. The way to win on the issue is go on offense and contrast Mr. Romney's patient-centered reform with President Obama's policy of government price controls and rationing medical care via a 15-member panel of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats.
Personalities aside, the larger strategic point is that Mr. Romney's best chance for victory is to make this a big election over big issues. Mr. Obama and the Democrats want to make this a small election over small thingsMitt's taxes, his wealth, Bain Capital. As the last two months have shown, Mr. Romney will lose that kind of election.
To win, Mr. Romney and the Republicans have to rise above those smaller issues and cast the choice as one about the overall direction and future of the country. Americans tell pollsters they are anxious and unhappy precisely because they instinctively know the country is troubled in ways it hasn't been since the 1970s. They know the economy is growing too slowly to raise middle-class incomes, while the government is growing too fast to be affordable.
Remember this everybody, the Dems tried to run against Paul Ryan in 2010. They were using him as a poster child for pushing granny off the cliff and they lost big time!
This is a great choice!
This is a stupid choice! We need Paul Ryan in Congress.
Congress is a colossal waste of his talents.
Agreed. And if Romney wins, we get President Ryan in eight years. Reagan Redux.
Actually, I’d prefer that Ryan stay in the House until we get spending under control!
Prolly don’t think he will live that long.
Agreed. The announcement will come Saturday, 9:00 AM (Eastern). It is going to be Ryan:
Doesn’t Paul Ryan support amnesty for illegal aliens?
Time for R&R to rock & roll.
Bump for an interesting article. thanks for posting it..
Wrong choice for reasons stated.
Should have been Bobby Jindal who has accomplishments as governor now, brings gravitas on healthcare, keeps the focus on repeal of Obamacare and would have been the antidote to Romneycare.
You’re obviously not from Louisiansa. The man is a typical politician, he tells you what you want to hear and does what he wants. Which is the opposite. He speaks out of both sides of his mouth.
Excellent choice-Ryan, IMO. Intelligent, conservative, great speaker/debater and he knows his stuff. If majority of Americans are so stupid and ill informed and make the same mistake voting for the Bamboozler-in-chief—again then whatever carpola they reap from it they will have richly earned it.
If I said just what I wanted to do, I’d get 0 votes from DU and only about 40% from here!
I’ll let everyone else argue their “best choice” with their own criteria. Paul Ryan is a fine choice for VP. He’s passionate on all his positives, and people can rally behind him.
*snort* Well, I didn’t get MY preference, but I’m excited for Ryan as Veep!