August 13, 2012, - 11:43 am

On Paul Ryan as Romney Veep

By Debbie Schlussel

Perhaps I’m belated in adding my two cents on Mitt Romney’s choice of Paul Ryan as his Vice Presidential nominee, and I wasn’t going to say anything, but so many readers and friends are asking. It has its pluses and minuses. And perhaps its plus–that he invigorates a tired, boring ticket with youth and exuberance–is validated by the fact that ABC chose to run an hour-long “View Hags Verbally Fellate Obama” re-run this morning to try to blunt the lift in polls and fundraising that the Ryan pick gave Romney.

I don’t find Paul Ryan as exciting as some do, though with him on the ticket I’m now more likely to vote for Romney than throw my vote away on some third party with no chance. Romney could have done a lot worse, and Ryan is not a bad choice. I like him a whole lot better than I do Romney. Still, I’ve referred to him previously on this site as “the P90X Congressman” (P90X is a great, intense, trendy video workout Ryan and some Republicans do in the early morning in the free, tax-paid House Gym they won’t shut down and to which they won’t cut funding–the “they” headed by Ryan). While he is a conservative and not the “safe,” very boring choice Romney could have picked, there are some things about him that aren’t so conservative. Paul Ryan voted for TARP and has been in Washington for decades, first as a Congressional staffer, then as a Congressman. He voted for the Employee Non-Discrimination Act, which would forbid any workplace discrimination against gays, including with employee benefits for the partners of gays, putting them on par with married couples. He explained his vote by saying that he believed his gay friends were born that way, but the bill could force churches and religious schools to hire openly gay teachers, against their beliefs, etc. On the other hand, he twice voted for the Defense of Marriage Act. Ryan voted for the massive, bloated Bush Medicare prescription bill that cost over $400 billion in new taxes. Real conservatives opposed that. And as the Republican budget hatchet man, he didn’t hatchet much of anything–keeping in specific tax funds to Planned Parenthood, NPR, and PBS, which should have been no-brainers for the Republican ax. That’s a “Tea Partier”? I guess “Tea Party” means you support Republican wasteful spending, but not Democrat wasteful spending.


People say that Ryan “cut his teeth” at the knees of Jack Kemp and Bill Bennett. But neither Kemp nor Bennett was a down-the-line conservative. In fact, they were downright squishy on much of what matters. Kemp fought conservatives like Ward Connerly in getting rid of discriminatory affirmative action preferences for minorities and women in admissions, promotions, and hiring. Kemp also hired racist, bigoted loon Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam to guard the federal housing projects. And he opposed conservative efforts to enact Arizona-style restrictions on illegal aliens. Bill Bennett shared a lot of those views. That said, I was a Jack Kemp follower (and a Kemp delegate to the 1988 Republican National Convention), and I don’t share his views on these issues. Maybe Paul Ryan doesn’t either. Ryan is a big fan of the far-left band, “Rage Against the Machine.” But I like the music and movies of some far-lefties. Doesn’t make me one. Still, with Romney and Ryan, I believe that we are at the point at which the GOP is like the British Conservative Party, in which the “Conservatives” are basically moderate Democrats as opposed to the Labor Party–our Democratic Party–which is the real liberals.

On the very positive side, Ryan is a marked improvement over and contrast to Sarah Palin. He actually knows what he’s talking about and comes across that way. He’s smart, articulate, and knowledgeable, and he’s not hiding from the media like Palin did. He will smoke Joe Biden in the Vice Presidential Debate, and I cannot wait to see that (and he won’t need to hole up for a week at the John McCain ranch to prepare a la Palin). I’ll bet it will be fun to watch. He knows the budget and the budget process inside out, so he’ll take apart the Obama administration on that topic and related issues of seniors and Medicare. Mitt Romney looks old and tiresome in comparison to Barack Obama. And Paul Ryan will help alleviate that. He makes Joe Biden look like that old uncle or grandpa, who embarrasses everyone at family get-togethers. Actually, even without Ryan as contrast, Biden looks and acts that way. But Paul Ryan will make that starkly clear.

Will Paul Ryan “deliver” Wisconsin or put it into play, as the conventional conservative wisdom has it? I doubt it. He’s only a Congressman, not a Governor. And Congressman–even as powerful and prominent as Ryan has become–don’t put states in play. The top of the ticket does that.

Mitt Romney is still at the top of the ticket. Still dull. And still not really a conservative, but just a flip-flopper who was a liberal and the inventor of ObamaCare, the last time he held the reins of power. Can Paul Ryan change that in people’s minds?

Doubtful. But he’s got the best shot of anyone and will certainly give it a “yeoman’s work” effort.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly



Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

55 Responses

After his Dad died, when Paul was 16, he was provided with Social Security benifits for 2yrs. He used that money to help pay for college.

Interesting, that same ‘entitlement’ he happily accepted back then is one of the first programs he intends to destroy! Hippocrite!

Lee on August 13, 2012 at 11:54 am

    Lee,I don’t think he intends to “destroy” social security, but reform it. If we don’t reform it, it will go broke. Is it wise to let them happen or should be make some changes to save it? What do you think Lee?

    David on August 13, 2012 at 12:07 pm

    Lee, how is he going to destroy Social Security? Do you have any specifics? Cite Something. I can view talking points on commercials.

    Worry on August 13, 2012 at 5:02 pm

He voted for employee benefits for the partners of gays, putting them on par with married couples, saying that he believed his gay friends were born that way.

If gays have money deducted from their paychecks for the company pension fund, gays should be able to designate that money to whoever they darn please, as should straights.

Miranda Rose Smith on August 13, 2012 at 12:00 pm

    and they can do that Miranda. They just can’t get spousal medical coverage which is the big benefits issue. The fact is ANYONE can leave an estate to ANYONE else they choose. Sure that heir may have a fight with the family but that happens with straight couples who are married. The point is it’s perfectly legal for me to leave my estate to my dog Lady if I choose and if I were gay, it would be perfectly legal for me to leave it to my partner. The samething with HIPPA. If you name your gay partner as the person you want to visit in the hospital and take charge if you are unable to, then you can do that legally.
    It’s the health coverage providers who are defining who is a dependent and who isn’t. They won’t cover the divorced spouse of the employee either even if s/he is being totally supported by alimony and the employee is deducting that alimony from his/her income tax and listing the ex as a dependent.

    Italkit on August 13, 2012 at 1:58 pm

      They just can’t get spousal medical coverage which is the big benefits issue.

      Miranda Rose Smith on August 15, 2012 at 6:21 am

      They just can’t get spousal medical coverage which is the big benefits issue.

      Dear Italkit: Thanks for the clarification.

      Miranda Rose Smith on August 15, 2012 at 6:23 am

It’s a sweet deal for Romney: this pick will bring some of the disillusioned conservatives back. And he will of course be the guy who gets blamed for any and all of Romney’s self-inflicted wounds.

It’s probably the best pick Romney could’ve made to increase his vote count. But the worst-case scenario is that Ryan brings back SOME of the disaffected, but not enough of them to put him over the top, and a Romney-style candidate remains viable for 2016.

Statusmonkey on August 13, 2012 at 12:11 pm

I’ve never been one to care much about the VP pick.

At the end of the day, the Pres candidate is who wins/loses these things. People aren’t voting on the VP.

It’s still Mitt Romney. And that’s a loser. Just like McCain.

PitandPen on August 13, 2012 at 12:24 pm

Curiously, Debbie did not mention Paul Ryan on Israel. So, does Ryan pass “The Israel Test,” as discussed in the book by George Gilder? It would appear, so far, that he does.

Ryan visited Israel in 2005, where he visited the Lebanon border and met with then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. From his website: “I believe at least one thing is clear: we cannot advocate for a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that jeopardizes Israel’s safety or legitimizes terrorism. Hamas, which is one of the two major Palestinian political factions, is an Islamist terrorist group whose charter calls for Israel’s destruction, refuses to recognize Israel’s existence, and calls Osama Bin Laden a “martyr.”

Ryan co-sponsored two pro-Israel bills. One, introduced by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in 2011, H. Res. 268, reaffirms the United States’ commitment to a negotiated settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through direct negotiations. He also co-sponsored H.R. 4133, the United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act, that states that it is United States policy to reaffirm the commitment to Israel’s security as a state, provide Israel with the military capabilities to defend itself, expand military and civilian cooperation, assist in a negotiated settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and encourage Israel’s neighbors to recognize its right to exist.”

Of course, talk is still cheap, and Ryan will not be calling the shots with respect to Israel, but picking Ryan at least could have some positive impact on this issue.

RA: He has been good on Israel. I agree. I haven’t heard anything from him on the Islamic threat, though. And I probably never will. DS

Ralph Adamo on August 13, 2012 at 12:30 pm

    Debbie and Ralph, there can be no negotiated settlement of the “conflict” and there can be no commitment to our security from people who don’t understand that. And the only way the US can “insure” anyone’s security is to be directly involved. We don’t need you here.

    Italkit on August 13, 2012 at 2:04 pm

    @Debbie, regarding the Islamic threat, you’re right. As noted by Cliff Kincaid in RenewAmerica.com:

    “Has he [Paul Ryan] followed up with a denunciation of Obama’s embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood? I can find no record of that. He was certainly not one of the five brave members of Congress asking for an official investigation of security problems and Muslim Brotherhood influence in the State Department. On his website, Ryan calls Hamas an Islamist terrorist group whose charter calls for Israel’s destruction, which refuses to recognize Israel’s existence, and calls Osama Bin Laden a “martyr.” Left unsaid [by Ryan] is that Hamas is a spin-off from the Muslim Brotherhood, the same group now running Egypt.”

    http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/kincaid/120813

    Ralph Adamo on August 13, 2012 at 4:30 pm

A true conservative will NEVER get elected. The choice was about winning the independent vote, which I hope happens with Ryan on the ticket. We cannot handle another four years of Obama/Biden.

Road Warrior on August 13, 2012 at 12:35 pm

This is the best and most important sentence (on a macro USA level) in this column…

“I believe that we are at the point at which the GOP is like the British Conservative Party, in which the “Conservatives” are basically moderate Democrats as opposed to the Labor Party–our Democratic Party–which is the real liberals.”

Absolutely! This is why IF Romney wins we can’t even pause to cheer. So much work to do. The fall will just go slower but we’ll still be in free-fall.

You can tell the Conservatives who really know their stuff from those who *THINK* they do because they are being fed regurgitated mush from mush-mouths…the ones in the know are pragmatic and honest about where Paul Ryan stands. The others are gushing over both Romney and Ryan. They should just be Liberals.

And the funny thing is I have heard so-called “Conservative” hosts be more hostile to Conservative callers who just portray Paul on his record (as DS has with this column) than to their snarky “Liberal” in-studio guests. But then I knew they were frauds already.

Skunky on August 13, 2012 at 12:37 pm

    If you look at Canada – Stephen Harper is very an economic conservative, balanced budgets, lowered taxes and try to keep the economy. He’s not a social conservative, not pro life, traditional marriage and all the other issues such conservatives would care about and there are few of them to make a difference there. But he’s better than the socialist opposition and Canadians understand it – he is just a good manager and he’s a trained economist. He knows how economies work.

    Romney should try to be like Harper, go back to the basics and do nothing exciting. If he can revive the economy, he’s done his job. That is what I think Republicans should do. With the Democrats becoming an American clone of Canada’s New Democrats, that is exactly the political ground in the center that the GOP should seek to occupy. A free economy beats a state-run one every time. Wherever conservatives govern, they go with what works. If the Democrats want a debate about it, let’s have it!

    NormanF on August 13, 2012 at 1:07 pm

      Well based on your advice, this Romney campaign must be running flawlessly. I guess we’ll see in November.

      We’ve already seen how your advice worked put in 2008, but let’s double down this time.

      Statusmonkey on August 13, 2012 at 2:16 pm

      Actually, Harper IS a social conservative, but is smart enough to realize that if he tries to impose his own social views, he won’t last in power. The country as a whole will not likely go for it. However, he has ended the Federal long gun registry, would LIKE to see the death penalty but will settle for real time-means-time jail sentences if it comes to that. He has had to move towards the center in governing Canada, to stay on top.

      Not Ovenready on August 13, 2012 at 10:51 pm

        Standards. You are lowering them.

        I don’t know anything about Canada, but you can scrub all talk about the “center” out of any discourse concerning the U.S. presidential election. One of the nominees is a left-winger, and his opponent is a member of the Communist party in all but name.

        Pardon me if I don’t embrace the idea that “the center” lies somewhere between these two dingleberries. If it did, it would be one tiny sliver of the electorate indeed.

        Statusmonkey on August 14, 2012 at 12:24 am

I don’t agree about Sarah Palin. She did not hide from the media and she is also knowledgeable and she trounced Biden in the debate.

I also disagree that Romney looks old and tiresome compared to Obama. I think Romney is far better looking than Obama.

Laura on August 13, 2012 at 12:41 pm

    @Laura – I’m not sure how accurate it is or what his background entails but there is a blog (Ulsterman Report) that claims BHO is pretty scrany and almost sickly-looking in real life.

    jdiz on August 13, 2012 at 12:58 pm

      Speaking of which, the picture of Romney being interviewed by Bob Schieffer, he doesn’t look well either. He’s showing his age and just looks sick. He may not last 4 years if he does win.

      Italkit on August 13, 2012 at 2:06 pm

      Jdiz

      BO looks like most gay drug addicts…

      As goes... on August 13, 2012 at 9:00 pm

I agree with the Ryan pick, as the Ryan budget proposal is going to be attacked by the do-nothing Dems who have controlled the Senate since 2007 and haven’t passed a budget since 2009. Who better than Ryan to defend it and say to seniors and others that Obama and the Dems stole $700 billion from Medicare?

Concerned Citizen on August 13, 2012 at 12:49 pm

We’ve seen him go toe-2-toe w/ POTUS and pretty much shred him, almost to the point where BHO agreed (see below). (Funny now that the same idea is ‘radical’ and ‘extreme.’)There’s not going to be a politician that is perfect but Ryan is 1000x better than what we currently have. Odds are we wont hear him say BFD and then try to sell it on a shirt later.

“I think Paul [Ryan], for example, the head of the Budget Committee, has looked at the budget and has made a serious proposal. I’ve read it. I can tell you what’s in it. And there are some ideas in there that I would agree with but there are some ideas we should have a healthy debate about because I don’t agree with them,” President Obama in 2010

jdiz on August 13, 2012 at 12:49 pm

The Republicans will keep the welfare state but will rein in the excess.

The Democrats want to go in the opposite direction more taxes, more spending and more entitlements – like the European socialists.

Obama has pushed us a long way in the direction of the European social democracies.

Reversing that is like pushing mountain and I doubt a President Mitt Romney could do it.

In some respects, being President is a lot different from being a Governor. Reagan brought a more conservative attitude with him to Washington and he learned from his mistakes as Governor Of California.

I don’t expect great surprises in the social issues department from Mitt Happens but he has a better understanding than most people in this country do of how the private sector works. Maybe he’ll show us learned from Massachusetts.

People would hire him as a manager of the economy but not much else. After, he is is a liberal in all the other things that count.

Paul Ryan is articulate and knowledgeable, he won’t flee from the media the way Sarah Palin did and one of the biggest criticisms Romney got is he was not willing to take the fight to Obama. Now he’s got a guy who can perform the traditional surrogate role of a Veep.

At the end of the day though, the only guy who can convince Americans he deserves to be in the White House is Romney and no running mate pick will do that for him.

NormanF on August 13, 2012 at 12:56 pm

I like Ryan. I live somewhat close to his district.

That having been unless Romney fires his press secretary he will lose.

After that disgraceful lying ad that a pro Obama PAC put out last week blaming Romney for the cancer death of a former employee (the ad falsely claimed that Bain fired someone, left the couple without health insurance and due to this lack of insurance the fired worker’s wife died of cancer) Romney’s press secretary responded with something along the lines of (I don’t remember the exact quote):

If they lived in Massachusetts they would have had Romney care and she would have lived …

I_AM_ME on August 13, 2012 at 1:07 pm

Romney is a liberal after all. The election is going to turn on the economy not on ideology.

Mitt Happens came along for a reason and its not because people are thrilled with his views. He was simply the safe pick for a party that has always liked safe picks.

And a safe pick won’t be a revolutionary in the White House. You are never going to see it from Romney and I am not his fan, I’m just laying out the main reason the country might decide to put him in charge.

NormanF on August 13, 2012 at 1:16 pm

    Hm, if someone ever COULD run an issues-free campaign and be elected by the sheer force of his personality and love for trees, it wouldn’t be Mitt Romney.

    He comes across as a spoiled whiny crybaby. He thinks there should be more jobs, you say? WHO DOESN’T?

    He’d better start acting like Obama is a conservative Republican and attack him soon. NOT just his “stewardship.”

    Statusmonkey on August 13, 2012 at 2:40 pm

Remember that the Mc Cain/Palin ticket got 46% of the vote.

Both were disasters for the GOP.

I do not believe either Romney or Ryan are “disasters”

We will watch for a last minute revelation by Obama of some sealed document to embarrass Romney.

Anyway, Ryan is a solid choice.

I think this ticket is a win for the GOP.

The goal is getting rid of Obama.

Panhandle on August 13, 2012 at 1:17 pm

Romney wasn’t my first choice. However once he was selected, the only thing that could make me not vote for him was if he chose that bloated islamophile in Trenton as his VP. I’m pleased with his choice of Ryan.

Laura on August 13, 2012 at 1:23 pm

Good overview, Debbie. Thanks.

DS_ROCKS! on August 13, 2012 at 2:03 pm

Road Warrior in an earlier post, “A true conservative will NEVER get elected.”

Ever heard of Ronald Reagan?

Debbie nailed it about the GOP turning to the American version of the British Conservative Party. THAT is what RARELY gets elected. People want a clear choice like Reagan provided. When it’s not a clear choice, like Romney vs. Obama, most seem to vote for the Democrat.

I think if Ronald Reagan was running this year he would clobber Obama in the biggest landslide in history. Just look at the people who gave Chik-Fil-A the biggest one day profit in history. There is a vast army of conservatives ready to have a reason to get out the vote. If one courageous conservative like Reagan is willing to take the heat from the media, he will easily win. Even the dummy Bush won by faking being a conservative.

Jeff_W on August 13, 2012 at 2:18 pm

I’m glad @ this choice, given the alternatives that were bandied about – Rice, Palin, Marco Rubio, et al. I agree that VP picks don’t do much for a ticket, but just prevent it from going south.

I agree w/ the analysis of Kemp – while Debbie supported him in 1988, that was ages before his being on the wrong sides of Propositions 187 and 209 in CA, so Debbie’s support of him in 1988 means little, unless he was a known Liberal on those issues then. In fact, the only reason Kemp & Bennett were attractive for some people was that they were pro Life. There was little else to recommend them, except for Bennett’s campaigns against the cultural decay in Hollywood.

I happen to think that sans Romney, Ryan alone would have been a better candidate, alongside someone like him. So far, if he’s said nothing on Islam, that’s still better than him saying the wrong things, such as Muslims are wonderful people, all Muslims are not terrorists, blah blah blah. Let’s face it – nobody who says about Islam or Muslims what Debbie says or we say has a snowball’s chance in hell of getting elected, but it would be good if that someone knew the same things about Muslims that we know, even if he doesn’t dare state them until they get elected.

Overall, I’m happy w/ this choice. I would have preferred it if he had picked Tom Tancredo – that would definitely have energized the Conservative base – at least, those of us who are serious about Immigration, the Muslim threats and so on. Tancredo doesn’t have the name recognition to drive away GOP voters into the (D) column, but his selection would have encouraged voters disillusioned about the GOP’s flip flops on both immigration and multiculturalism to support the ticket.

At any rate, while Romney may have his issues, a second Obama term would leave him free to do anything he wants w/o fear of not getting re-elected e.g. declaring war on Israel. Which is why it’s important to support the Romney-Ryan ticket come November.

Infidel on August 13, 2012 at 2:42 pm

The election is lost- pure and simple. Chalk one up for that lefty propaganda machine- none other than the fabian-socialists. Attacks on the wealthy, the phony war-on-women, and branding an entire party as “racists” are all examples of cunning strategy premeditation.

The only hope is to change the Senate…

Patrick on August 13, 2012 at 3:53 pm

    Patrick, if Romney-Ryan goes down in flames, you will not only not take the U.S. Senate, but the U.S. House could see its Republican majority reduced or even eliminated. If people do not go to the polls, the very worst will become inevitable.

    Worry on August 13, 2012 at 5:06 pm

“…Romney could have done a lot worse, and Ryan is not a bad choice…”

That’s the top thing I like about the pick – it’s not Palin, Clueless Condi, Portman, Pawlenty, Rubio, et al. You’re darn right he could have done a lot worse!

CornCoLeo on August 13, 2012 at 4:18 pm

I guess I’ll have to be somewhat of a contrarian today.

Ryan probably is better than the other leading picks, since he is not as colorless as most of them (e.g. Portman, Pawlenty, etc.)

But I’ve always thought of him as somewhat one-dimensional, focused on budget issues. And he has one arm tied behind his back there, since the Romney campaign is really being low-key on repealing Obamacare. They pay lip service to it, just like they say “all options are on the table” re Iran. But they have already indicated they’ll keep a number of features of Obamacare, and, in all probability, they’ll keep most or all of it in one form or another. If they won’t go after Obamacare, I’m not very optimistic about their going after anything else, and it will be pretty hard to prevent budget increases.

I guess I also have a minority view about age vs. youth. I think experience trumps youth, everything else being equal. Looking at Reagan, Churchill, Clinton and Obama offers some evidence for my point of view. Especially considering the increasing dependence of young (I guess that means 26 & under) people these days, and the progressive dumbing down and left-wing nature of education. The more recently people have been educated, the more they are subjected to dumbing down and left-wing indoctrination. So while appeal to youth might help get someone elected, there is likely to be a price paid for that. Some societies respect the knowledge and experience older people have acquired, but the USA is not one of them — and we have suffered for this.

I am more optimistic though, about his helping to carry Wisconsin, mainly because his candidacy occurs in the context of the recent Walker victory, and he is strongly identified with Walker in Wisconsin. That will help in Wisconsin, especially if Walker actively campaigns in Wisconsin and elsewhere.

But my biggest fear is of what I’m afraid is Ryan’s apparent tendency to make Palinesque comments. On the Glenn Beck show this morning he was discussing his conservative, Janesville, Wisconsin upbringing, and mentioned that Janesville is relatively close to Madison.

Me mentioned that in his youth, he heard about the progressive influences emanating from Madison, sparked by German emigres at UW. Perhaps to cover himself, he mentioned Bismarck in the next breath (who did introduce some welfare measures in Germany in the late 19th century.)

What?!? The Progressive movement was complex, containing lots of strands. There was, in fact, a very strong native-born element to it (i.e. teaching immigrants American ways, implementing civilized American norms, overcoming unfavorable foreign eugenics), etc. Certainly, few if any German immigrants were part of that. In fact, many Progressives were in favor of governmental efficiency, and reduction of corruption, and not necessarily big Government, along with their push for more regulations. By World War I, the push for big government won, but that was during World War I, under Woodrow Wilson, who, if anything, was not particularly friendly to German immigrants.

So what were these foreign influences? Since Ryan did not disclose precisely which time period or decade he was referring to, might he have been referring to German immigrants fleeing Hitler and finding refuge at the University of Wisconsin? Although many were radical, they weren’t the primary influences of Progressivism, or even the New Deal. The Roosevelts, Wilson, La Follette, etc. were much more prominent, and many of the emigres were more beneficiaries than movers of the Progressive (or New Deal) movement.

My immediate question when I heard this was which German influences was he referring to? The overwhelmingly Jewish Frankfurt School? Or other Jewish U of W professors who came here from Germany in the 1930s? A pernicious Jewish influence? Of course Beck did not call him on any of this, but sooner or later, if he keeps this type of shallowness up, there will be major consequences to the ticket.

Little Al on August 13, 2012 at 5:18 pm

And Skunky makes some very good points — especially about conservative talk-show hosts.

Little Al on August 13, 2012 at 5:48 pm

    Thank you, Little Al. This site makes it possible (if one is paying attention) to state and know the TRUTH. We learn how to sniff out all the frauds.

    And when I hear so-called Conservatives having orgasms over Sununu I KNOW they don’t know the whole story. Same with Jihad Darrell and others of that ilk.

    Skunky on August 13, 2012 at 7:07 pm

*He explained his vote by saying that he believed his gay friends were born that way, but the bill could force churches and religious schools to hire openly gay teachers, against their beliefs, etc.*

That is a worrying sign. It shows he is no true conservative and is going to morph into a liberal Republican as soon as he gets any executive power. Conservatives don’t base their beliefs on what some friends believe.

If he is voting on legislation because of what his friends want him to do, then forget about him defending our borders and protecting the nation against Islam. He is the type who will say, “I personally have a Muslim as a friend, and my Muslim friend is really nice and no extremist. Therefore, I have no problem with increasing the amount of Muslims entering the country every year.”

John M. on August 13, 2012 at 6:40 pm

Romney is a weak debater, and the Republicans have (as always) allowed the Dems to pick liberal moderators. I don’t think this is a problem for Ryan, who will smoke Biden. Romney doesn’t have the think-on-your-feet skills necessary to deal with attacks from Obama and the moderator. He’s going to look like McCain out there, not a pretty sight.

Adam on August 13, 2012 at 6:47 pm

The world is screwed no matter who gets into office in Washington, DC.

Miriam on August 13, 2012 at 7:31 pm

Yup, that about sums it up – even if the GOP takes over the Senate, there is no guarantee GOP one party unified control of Washington will make any more difference (assuming Romney wins) than it did during the Bush years.

NormanF on August 13, 2012 at 7:52 pm

“I don’t find Paul Ryan as exciting as some do, though with him on the ticket I’m now more likely to vote for Romney than throw my vote away on some third party with no chance” says DS.
You consider yourself an intelligent person yet you have entertained the thought of NOT voting for Romney? I hate that Romney is our choice too, but would you really have thrown a vote away knowing that doing so would be like voting for Obama. Obama will continue to throw us all under the bus and over the cliff as well, yet you would throw a vote away and help him return to office. Not very smart for someone who has a very high opinion of their intelligence quota.

Blanco on August 13, 2012 at 10:38 pm

“You consider yourself an intelligent person yet you have entertained the thought of NOT voting for Romney? … Not very smart for someone who has a very high opinion of their intelligence quota”.

Blanco, you transsexual twat and moron. First, your avatar sez female but your nic sez male. If you weren’t a Mittens operative you would know to write “Blanca.” Second, if you were not a moron you would know the difference between “quota” and “quotient.”

NO to Mittens! 100 times NO!

skzion on August 13, 2012 at 11:22 pm

    Skzion: Why do you feel the need to so hatefully attack me because of the comment to made to DS? I have greatly admired Debbie for years, I have encouraged others to read her blog for her great articles. But no one is perfect and neither is DS and I am sure she can take some criticism here and there, she’s a big girl. Besides, what I said is true, a vote not for Romney, even though we hate our choice, IS A VOTE for Obama. Does she need your type to attack people who comment here? Did my comment make you feel threatened in some way or do you just use the same thug tactics used by leftists to shut people down that you don’t like. I have noticed the last couple of years that the die hard obsequious posters here think she is 100% right all the time and anyone not constantly stroking her ego is attacked. A few of the commenters here have become as thuggish as those they denigrate.

    Blanco on August 14, 2012 at 8:17 am

      Blanco sez:

      “Skzion: Why do you feel the need to so hatefully attack me because of the comment to made to DS? I have greatly admired Debbie for years, I have encouraged others to read her blog for her great articles.”

      Yeah, I’ll bet you’ve admired her. Oddly, I don’t recall seeing you around before, though.

      “But no one is perfect and neither is DS and I am sure she can take some criticism here and there, she’s a big girl.”

      Well, so are you, whether or not you are a Genuine Girl.

      “Besides, what I said is true, a vote not for Romney, even though we hate our choice, IS A VOTE for Obama.”

      Duh. Moronic cliche. You couldn’t possibly be a regular here or you wouldn’t offer us this stuff. Those who assess a second term of Hussein as the End of Time are rational to vote for Mittens. Others who are more realistic consider future elections.

      “Did my comment make you feel threatened in some way or do you just use the same thug tactics used by leftists to shut people down that you don’t like.”

      “Lady,” you couldn’t possibly make me feel threatened. If you come here with your nasty, snide comments about Debbie and her intelligence, you should expect to be treated likewise. You are a paid Mittens operative using “the same thug tactics used by leftists.”

      “I have noticed the last couple of years that the die hard obsequious posters here think she is 100% right all the time and anyone not constantly stroking her ego is attacked.”

      Yeah, I’ll bet you “have noticed.” Only a liar (a.k.a. a partisan operative) would claim that the regulars here think she is 100% right.

      Buzz off, Blanco. You don’t fool people here. Frankly, I loathe the whole Republican operative stratum for what its members are: traitors.

      Love, skzion

      skzion on August 14, 2012 at 2:40 pm

        Let’s see, you called me: a liar, traitor, transsexual twice, mittens operative, moron twice, twat, and you insist I don’t know my own name. You really do have some anger issues and should seek professional mental health care before you have a complete meltdown and become a danger to yourself or to those around you. And unless DS loses people like you it could reflect badly back onto her and that would be a shame.

        Blanco on August 14, 2012 at 4:25 pm

          I think I called you a transsexual three times.

          skzion on August 14, 2012 at 8:00 pm

The liberal assault on Paul Ryan has commenced. But the first round of attacks can’t provide much solace to Democrats, who assume they will be able to demonize the Republican vice presidential candidate with ease.

The first 48 hours of Ryan’s candidacy has already seen a deluge of abuse from the mainstream media editorial pages and columnists

jean vercors on August 13, 2012 at 11:51 pm

Just read in the NY Daily News that his wife comes from a hard core Democratic political family and the schleppy clothing on Paul, the kids and atrocious taste on Janna do not mitigate the fact that she is a Wellesley graduate and lawyer as was her mother. Their attempt to be “just folks” is not working. Don’t be fooled. They are both children of privilege.

Italkit on August 14, 2012 at 4:05 am

I don’t think Romney’s stupid — he’s quite intelligent, but Adam’s point about the debate ‘moderators’ is well taken. The fact that the Republicans didn’t object tells us that their campaign will trend towards the left, so as to make a good impression on the ‘moderators’, and to answer the probable questions in a way that they think won’t antagonize the viewers.

The fact that Republicans agree to moderators like this time nd time again shows us where their politics really are.

I can’t remember William F. Buckley or Debbie ever moderating one of these debates.

Little Al on August 14, 2012 at 9:54 am

    They don’t have to put up with these moderators; if they would just refuse to play with Noam Chomsky or whoever as the moderator, the moderator would change.

    A threat to boycott the debate could get Romney just about any moderator he wanted, except maybe for Beck/Hannity/etc.

    Statusmonkey on August 14, 2012 at 10:45 am

Hi Debbie. Like you, I don’t find Paul Ryan exciting, nor was his selection “bold” as so many have said. However, he does add legitimate conservative credentials to the ticket, which Romney the moderate needed.
As for putting WI in play, I believe Ryan DOES put the Badger State in play. He is not an obscure congressman the way Miller was in 1964 when he ran with Barry Goldwater. he is nationally known (to those of us who pay attention) because he chairs the Budget Cmte. and battled with Obummer head on.
Debbie, we will never have the perfect ticket. Please don’t chuck your vote away. Romney may be the top of the ticket and a weak candidate at that, but he is still infinitely better than an Obummer who is openly hostile to Israel, has openly declared war on the private sector and will forge ahead with plans to socialize as much of this country as possible.

Sanford Horn on August 15, 2012 at 11:01 am

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field