Paul Ryan is the VP pick

[votetovote]

HatTrick that would be very nice

 

[Katzndogz]

The choice of Ryan is a recognition that the center of US politics no longer exists. The nation is divided. This election is about which direction the country will take.

It is so clear that even obama recognizes it. Will we return to a Constitutional republic and free market capitalism or forward into a socialist dictatorship. Back to what worked or forward in Venezuela?

 

[Amazed]

(sigh) Ryan will be a VP he can do nothing.

 

[votetovote]

(sigh) Ryan will be a VP he can do nothing.

You right he wont do anything.

But its his figure head status that will.

 

[antagon]

The choice of Ryan is a recognition that the center of US politics no longer exists. The nation is divided. This election is about which direction the country will take.

It is so clear that even obama recognizes it. Will we return to a Constitutional republic and free market capitalism or forward into a socialist dictatorship. Back to what worked or forward in Venezuela?

US politics will always have a center, buddy. Americans are rightfully apathetic toward political outcomes on even the most contested elections. This is a centrist nation with loud politicians pulling on either end.

Hint: "we are divided" is political rhetoric aimed at dislodging a few gullubles from the center.

 

[hortysir]

With a election centered on economic policy, choosing a 'bold' and 'radical' conservative budget-wrangler as a running mate is not an appeal to the center. I think this is a loosing move in an election which needs some intelligent economic debate.

Ryan was a horrible pick for Mittens!
Now he has lost any chances he had to gain the
moderate and independent votes he needed.

Take a few minutes to research Ryan's voting record before you say he can't be moderate

Perhaps he has voted moderately in the past, however most will not take the time to look up his record (and to my knowledge he's a pretty stanch right winger).
He is very well known for his right wing views. Most people see that aspect of him...

don’t try and fight it

Mittens is doomed..

Bookmarked

 

[hortysir]

With a election centered on economic policy, choosing a 'bold' and 'radical' conservative budget-wrangler as a running mate is not an appeal to the center. I think this is a loosing move in an election which needs some intelligent economic debate.

Ryan was a horrible pick for Mittens!
Now he has lost any chances he had to gain the
moderate and independent votes he needed.

Take a few minutes to research Ryan's voting record before you say he can't be moderate

He 'can be' moderate, perhaps, but that is not supported by his ideology or his policy proposals. I don't think anything about his voting record indicates even remotely that he ever has been a moderate before.

I know

 

[hortysir]

(sigh) Ryan will be a VP he can do nothing.

You right he wont do anything.

But its his figure head status that will.

Because Biden has such influence?



ok

 

[votetovote]

(sigh) Ryan will be a VP he can do nothing.

You right he wont do anything.

But its his figure head status that will.

Because Biden has such influence?



ok

No I don’t think he does.

Biden has been in there for a while so folks are more comfortable with him. Plus he is not as extreme left as Ryan is extreme right.
IMO, and I think in most others as well.

 

[Liability]

LOL!

A bit off the current flow of this topic:

I am listening to Rush in the background.

He often does the EXPOSE THEM trick of playing the lib talking heads' and spokes-persons' audio sound-bites one after the other.

The talking point du jour appears to be that WITH the selection of Ryan, this Election is no long a "referendum on Obama." Now it's a by-god "choice."

Crack-pot after crack-pot intoned some close variant of that theme.

Funny stuff.

The truth of course is that many conservatives have been saying all along that it is both. It has to be a referendum on the FAILURE in CHIEF. But it ALSO has to be defined more clearly. to that end, many conservatives have urged for the Romney campaign to make clear cut policy statements and to articulate and stake out a path of their own.

Team Obama is in very real trouble, now.

 

[Full-Auto]

I haven't posted here in a long time. Cool to see many of the same opinionists at work.

On topic: I can't believe that the GOP has gone this S.Palin-like route again. Either party must control the center to earn the presidency, but the GOP has not caught on.

Ryan has his head on his shoulders as a hill-savvy lawmaker, but he is too 'wrong' under rational examination as a policymaker. Too many on either side of the aisle have questioned his radical... understanding... of economic/fiscal policy.

But they have caught on.......................We hope...........

Note the Obama admin cowers from updates............


Government - Historical Debt Outstanding – Annual

Either party must control the center to earn the presidency ...

But they have caught on.......................We hope...........


it would seem logical to at least encompass the center than chose an idealog Ryan bound entirely to the right of the political spectrum as Palin ...

good luck on "having caught on" as an admission for a needed change from 2008 that is rather hard to recognize.

HatTrick - the Democrats win all three: House Senate President.

you should try out for comedy central.

But if the low life of this country can support the blatant corruption. The target environment has gotten richer.

 

[EriktheRed]

So, just to get this right, Paul Ryan and his family are beneficiaries of expanded government spending to improve infrastructure. They continue to benefit from government contracts, including state and local ones. That's Paul Ryan, whose budget would inevitably gut most infrastructure spending and who, with Mitt Romney, wants to shrink federal spending to the point where, if the federal government had felt that way throughout a good chunk of the 20th century, his family would not have made a dime and, well, then we would have never heard about Paul Ryan.

That's the depth of hypocrisy in play here.

Of course, now, Ryan Incorporated builds a lot of golf courses. So who needs improved roads when you've got that?

Update: As others have pointed out, like many conservatives who got where they are thanks to government programs, Ryan is all about biting the hands that fed him.

And sharp-eyed rude reader David C. points out that, if his family was involved in building O'Hare airport, wouldn't the Ryans have been involved in evil Chicago politics?

The Rude Pundit

 

[Ravi]

According to wikipedia, Social Security paid for Ryan's college education.

Ironic.

Now he wants to cut everything, including Mitten's taxes.

 

[votetovote]

According to wikipedia, Social Security paid for Ryan's college education.

Ironic.

Now he wants to cut everything, including Mitten's taxes.

Mittens will Love that!

 

[hortysir]

According to wikipedia, Social Security paid for Ryan's college education.

Ironic.

Now he wants to cut everything, including Mitten's taxes.

I'll ask you the same thing I've asked every other pudding-head that's made that lame assertion.

Can you quote the part of the Ryan Plan that calls for elimination of SS benefits?

 

[hortysir]

According to wikipedia, Social Security paid for Ryan's college education.

Ironic.

Now he wants to cut everything, including Mitten's taxes.

Mittens will Love that!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbzpuqWo6yU]Erskine Bowles: Ryan budget is "sensible...honest, serious" - YouTube[/ame]

 

[amrchaos]

I don't think Paul Ryan was a bad pick in terms of government.

But in terms of politics, it could scare some independents away.


Now here is the question I am asking--why Ryan?
Is it not better to keep him in Congress where he is bullish on budgets versus having him mostly invisible and doing practically nothing except whipping votes in the Senate?

If I did not know any better, I would say that Ryan as VP neutralize his ability to fight for a balanced budget. It puts his ideas on ice for say another 8 years and allows the republicans to ignore fiscal policies.

I really want Ryan in the House fighting for balanced budget. As of now, fiscal conservatives in Congress are a very rare breed, but having some one as strident on the issue as Ryan gives a better chance of obtain sound fiscal policies within the government.

I doubt Romney's choice in Ryan was due to making his presidentcy in to a fiscal one. I suspect that ryan as VP was to keep from having to deal with balancing the budget.

Of course, I may be over thinking the pick. But it is a bit astonishing to me to see this choice.

 

[hortysir]

I don't think Paul Ryan was a bad pick in terms of government.

But in terms of politics, it could scare some independents away.


Now here is the question I am asking--why Ryan?
Is it not better to keep him in Congress where he is bullish on budgets versus having him mostly invisible and doing practically nothing except whipping votes in the Senate?

If I did not know any better, I would say that Ryan as VP neutralize his ability to fight for a balanced budget. It puts his ideas on ice for say another 8 years and allows the republicans to ignore fiscal policies.

I really want Ryan in the House fighting for balanced budget. As of now, fiscal conservatives in Congress are a very rare breed, but having some one as strident on the issue as Ryan gives a better chance of obtain sound fiscal policies within the government.

I doubt Romney's choice in Ryan was due to making his presidentcy in to a fiscal one. I suspect that ryan as VP was to keep from having to deal with balancing the budget.

Of course, I may be over thinking the pick. But it is a bit astonishing to me to see this choice.

Let's look "forward" a moment.

Republicans gain some seats in the Senate.
But not quite enough to take majority. Just enough for a tie.



Who's the tie-breaker in the Senate?

 

[freedombecki]

Congressman Ryan's Homecoming speech yesterday in Wisconsin was really, really good.

 

[freedombecki]

I don't think Paul Ryan was a bad pick in terms of government.

But in terms of politics, it could scare some independents away.


Now here is the question I am asking--why Ryan?
Is it not better to keep him in Congress where he is bullish on budgets versus having him mostly invisible and doing practically nothing except whipping votes in the Senate?

If I did not know any better, I would say that Ryan as VP neutralize his ability to fight for a balanced budget. It puts his ideas on ice for say another 8 years and allows the republicans to ignore fiscal policies.

I really want Ryan in the House fighting for balanced budget. As of now, fiscal conservatives in Congress are a very rare breed, but having some one as strident on the issue as Ryan gives a better chance of obtain sound fiscal policies within the government.

I doubt Romney's choice in Ryan was due to making his presidentcy in to a fiscal one. I suspect that ryan as VP was to keep from having to deal with balancing the budget.

Of course, I may be over thinking the pick. But it is a bit astonishing to me to see this choice.

Let's look "forward" a moment.

Republicans gain some seats in the Senate.
But not quite enough to take majority. Just enough for a tie.



Who's the tie-breaker in the Senate?

lol!