Monday, August 13, 2012

“Why Romney Chose Ryan”

The Games are over, let THE Game begin.

Not that running for President of the United States hasn’t become a full-time job for the current resident of the Oval Office…well, except for his other job, golf - or his third job, jabbing. But now that Romney has made his vice-presidential choice public, the real blood, sweat and tears will begin to flow. As Obama said, “bring a knife”…that’s the good old Chicago Way, especially if you’re agin guns and such.

Romney’s pick of Paul Ryan gets my vote. Before this it was my reluctant vote. Lining up Romney's deep and wide executive experience, his success and well-honed team-player skills against the thin-skinned poseur/loner we have now, it was never really a question for me. But with Ryan on the ticket? Financial reform here we come!

Either way the vote goes in November, Ryan will remain in office. He’s running for his Congressional seat in his home district in Wisconsin, a seat he retained even as Obama carried Wisconsin in the 2008 election. He registered to run in June, I think, and he probably thought his chances of being chosen by Romney were only middling. I expect he’ll do this whole-heartedly, but winning will entail a wrenching farewell to a chamber where he struggled long and hard to educate his fellow Congressmen in economics. This video, from early August, is a good preview of what you'll see on the campaign trail, and what I've been watching for a while now:

Paul Ryan is articulate, handsome, and devoutly Christian.. He’s been a good son and family man. He’s so clean he squeaks — but don’t worry, they’ll find some grade school caper he was in on. Romney and Ryan are hard to rile, but we can rely on the Dem smear machine to give its all in the attempt to break them. The stakes are mortally high this time around.

From Kim Strassel’s essay, Why Romney Chose Ryan

Mitt Romney did much more this weekend than announce a running mate. He unveiled a significant change in strategy. The 2012 election is now a choice, not just a referendum.


Mr. Romney’s choice of House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan, one of the party’s star reformers, is an attempt to break out of the stalemate, change the dynamic. It was foremost a shrewd acknowledgment on Mr. Romney’s part that his path to the White House is going to take more than pointing out the obvious. He needs to run on bold ideas, as Mr. Ryan has, and convince Americans those ideas are the way to prosperity.

In fairness…

The Romney campaign had the elements in place. It’s taken some time, but Mr. Romney today is sporting a fairly bold reform agenda, from his tax cuts to his Medicare reforms, to his vow to end ObamaCare. And the candidate has been dutifully repeating that this election is a choice between two very different futures for the country. Yet his policy and his words were largely lost amid his campaign’s intense focus on the president.

Mr. Ryan provides the crucial shift in emphasis, the opportunity to go on offense. We will now have a focus on, and explanation of, the choice between stagnation and renewal. This is what Mr. Ryan excels at—not just crafting ideas, but explaining them in a positive and serious way. This ability is why the congressman—despite his supposedly extremist reform blueprint and budget (says the left)—has continued to win a district that in 2008 went for Mr. Obama.
This material is from an editorial by Kim Strassel that ran in the Wall Street Journal. However, I accessed it via Real Clear Politics, here. The editorial link is probably more stable since RCP changes its material on a regular basis.

Ms. Strassel is an opinion essayist at WSJ; she writes their Potomac Watch section. I generally like her point of view.


Reliapundit said...

ryan can only help with one demographic:

independents - who crave a debate of issues and ideas and hate nae-calling.

this is why mitt picked him and why the ticket is a winner.

Anonymous said...

I don't see why anyone really cares. Isn't that like arguing who should be captain of the Titanic, when it is clear the ship will sink?

Dymphna said...

Thanks, Reliapundit.


No, Anon. It matters deeply. If Romney loses, then it won't matter. The statists will destroy the ship and scuttle it.

Username_Unavailable said...

Romney is himself a statist! Romneycare ring a bell for anyone?

Honestly, I thought this website was smarter than this. I thought the people here--particularly the writers--were mature enough to see past the phony Republican/Democrat divide. The Republicans and the Democrats represent two sides of the same coin. The flavor of tyranny may vary between them, but substantively they're both the same. You guys haven't figured this out yet?

Paul Ryan voted for TARP, NCLB, the permanency of the Patriot Act, NDAA, GM and Chrysler bailouts, Obama's stimulus, and he co-sponsored the 2005 amnesty bill. And that's just the start of it. Yet you're telling me I should be excited about this guy as a VP?

Until Americans wake up to the fact that both parties are intent on raping our liberties, nothing will change.

Anonymous said...

After listening to Paul Ryan take the President to the woodshed over campaigning instead of presenting a seriousl budget proposal, I was all in for the ticket. I was holding my nose and voting for Romney until he made his statements on Israel and his visit to Poland. At that point I decided to actually be for him. The addition of Paul Ryan to the ticket makes it a no-brainer to willingly support them.

Pat H. said...

Ryan supported:
Bailouts 1 & 2
PATRIOT Act, including making it permanent
No Child Left Behind
Drugs for Seniors, the largest increase in welfare since Lyndon Johnson
All wars for Israel; including the War Against Afghanistan and Iraq
...and many other progressive programs and bills.

The man isn't just "not conservative enough", he's not conservative at all, just like Romney.

Anonymous said...

Drugs for Seniors? I quite like the sound of that program. Where do I sign up?

Romney's pro-Israel stance is of vital importance, I believe. Domestic issues, well maybe the whole of the States if going to hell in a handbasket and there's so much debt, he's going to have his work cut out to wrestle the steering wheel around and alter course.

But at least on the crucial issue of the day (and it's likely that it will be) Romney's more likely to stand with Israel, and therefore against her enemies ... who are also our enemies.

That's a big plus. Massive in fact. When you think about what's coming over the horizon in the next few years.

Anonymous said...

It is imperative that we get someone that actually loves his country and European Christendom into the presidency...even if he isnt ideologically pure.

Furthermore, the replacement of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is of utmost importance and whilst no guarantee, a Republican President will probably put a real conservative on the court as they have learned from past mistakes about "non-ideological" picks like OConnor and Souter haunting them and moving the Leftist agenda forward via activist jurisprudence.

The heavily Tea Party influenced GOP House and soon to be Senate can do the rest.

Furthermore Romney will direct the Executive Branch regulatory agencies much better, and they wont be used as a hammer to bash Conservative States, indiviudals, businesses, a heavily politicized manner as has been done under the Obama Admin, especially with regards the Justice Department, the EPA, Homeland Security, and the National Labor Relations Board, to name just a few.

Hopefully Joel and company will wise up, hold their noses, and vote for Romney and Ryan.



1389 said...

Regardless of whether Romney is good or bad - he is NOT a Muslim. Obama is. We must get out there and vote for the non-Muslim.