Paul Ryan is the VP pick

[freedombecki]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yO8-bhcxwZo]Paul Ryan's Homecoming Rally Speech in Wisconsin 08/12/2012 - YouTube[/ame]
​

 

[freedombecki]

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

Yes he can!

Vice Presidents in the past have been able to do plenty:

1. He will be able to influence legislation when a tie breaker is on the floor of the Senate.
2. He will be giving good advice to President Romney about fiscal issues to (a) bring the dollar back (b) restart the energy industry (c) promote small businesses to create jobs (d) pay down the debt and (e) promote legislation that requires a balanced budget
3. When pressing issues are at hand, he will be able to stand in for the President and the American people at things the President cannot attend--state weddings, financial summits, international environmental pow-wows, disasters, conferences, and anything that comes up the President cannot attend due to pressing national matters.
4. Some Presidents choose to make their running mates their best friends; others just value their input; others are grooming their replacement. It could be Romney has the good presence of mind to pick him because he will represent him in a Presidential way and for all the right reasons; if he notices the President has a cold, he will call the doctor.
5. Strengthen the U. S. President at home and abroad.

Oh, my gosh, Romney has shown great wisdom and courage in choosing this gutsy young man whose words are so clear and true, they will be heard in the hearts of good men and good women around the world.

 

[Seawytch]

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?

First can you point to the individual that made the claim?

Here's what his "budget" would do...

Ryan’s Social Security privatization proposal, the Social Security Personal Savings Guarantee and Prosperity Act of 2005, which he sponsored along with then-Sen. John Sununu (whose father has been a prominent Romney surrogate), would have allowed workers to funnel an average of 6.4 percent of their 12.4 percent payroll-tax contribution to a private account. Lower-income workers would be able to divert more of their wages, as the plan allows 10 percent of income up to $10,000 and 5 percent of income up to the payroll tax cap to be diverted. By default, the private account would be invested in a portfolio set by the Social Security Administration of 65 percent stocks and 35 percent bonds. Workers could choose an 80/20 stock-bond portfolio, or a 50-50 portfolio, but would not be able to pick individual stocks or bonds. At retirement, all participants in the plan would be required to buy an annuity.

The Social Security Administration concluded that the Ryan-Sununu plan would require huge increases in general budget revenue to make up the shortfall left in payroll tax revenue. Specifically, revenue would have to increase by 1.5 percent of GDP every year, an analysis by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities found, or about $225 billion at current GDP. That’s a big honking tax hike. What’s more, under the plan, investments in the stock and bond markets would skyrocket such that by 2050, every single stock or bond in the United States would be owned by a Social Security account. This would mean that the portfolio managers at the Social Security Administration would more or less control the entire means of production in the United States.

Funnily enough, Ryan also proposed a resolution in 1999 that passed the House (with only Ron Paul voting against) expressing the sense of the body that Social Security should be maintained without any changes to benefits for current retirees or increases taxes.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...l-ryans-non-budget-policy-record-in-one-post/

 

[hortysir]

2005?
A proposal that didn't pass from 7 years ago?

That's what you're going on?

Besides that, why do we need to raise revenue when all we have to do is cut spending?

 

[freedombecki]

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?

First can you point to the individual that made the claim?

Here's what his "budget" would do...

Ryan’s Social Security privatization proposal, the Social Security Personal Savings Guarantee and Prosperity Act of 2005, which he sponsored along with then-Sen. John Sununu (whose father has been a prominent Romney surrogate), would have allowed workers to funnel an average of 6.4 percent of their 12.4 percent payroll-tax contribution to a private account. Lower-income workers would be able to divert more of their wages, as the plan allows 10 percent of income up to $10,000 and 5 percent of income up to the payroll tax cap to be diverted. By default, the private account would be invested in a portfolio set by the Social Security Administration of 65 percent stocks and 35 percent bonds. Workers could choose an 80/20 stock-bond portfolio, or a 50-50 portfolio, but would not be able to pick individual stocks or bonds. At retirement, all participants in the plan would be required to buy an annuity.

The Social Security Administration concluded that the Ryan-Sununu plan would require huge increases in general budget revenue to make up the shortfall left in payroll tax revenue. Specifically, revenue would have to increase by 1.5 percent of GDP every year, an analysis by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities found, or about $225 billion at current GDP. That’s a big honking tax hike. What’s more, under the plan, investments in the stock and bond markets would skyrocket such that by 2050, every single stock or bond in the United States would be owned by a Social Security account. This would mean that the portfolio managers at the Social Security Administration would more or less control the entire means of production in the United States.

Funnily enough, Ryan also proposed a resolution in 1999 that passed the House (with only Ron Paul voting against) expressing the sense of the body that Social Security should be maintained without any changes to benefits for current retirees or increases taxes.

Paul Ryan’s non-budget policy record, in one post

Funnily enough, Ryan also proposed a resolution in 1999 that passed the House (with only Ron Paul voting against) expressing the sense of the body that Social Security should be maintained without any changes to benefits for current retirees or increases taxes.

1999? I think Congressman Ryan is a little older in 2012, and I think he is running with a more experienced executive who will be the ultimate President who values Ryan as a person filling the Vice Presidential role. Congressman Ryan is known as a team player in Congress. Everybody respects his respect for other players.

You can't beat that with a stick, dear.

 

[thanatos144]

This is a damn good choice and the proof is in this thread with all the Progressives eagerly trying to downplay him......Not only did Ryan make a budget he made one with teeth. Now you all are saying he will cut Medicare...Hey progressives your president already did this with the affordable care act ....

 

[antagon]

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.

This is a good point here.

the pick affords some advancement on the fiscal agenda just by elevating Ryan to this stage.. with or without a presidential win. I don't think that Ryan's budget bravado will be well received by the whole spectrum of potential GOP voters as much as it may serve to block leaks to libertarian candidates or plain apathy in the base on any of the tickets.

Lots of contrast w/ Romney himself. Mitt's got to act dominant for sure.

 

[American_Jihad]

The Promise of Paul Ryan

Posted by Jacob Laksin
Aug 13th, 2012

---
A related problem is that the public does not really understand the importance of the issues – government spending generally and the runway government spending on entitlement programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security specifically – on which Ryan has made his reputation in the Republican Party. While Americans routinely overestimate how much the federal government spends on foreign aid, they just as often underestimate how much it spends domestically. For instance, a CBS poll in 2011 found that less than a quarter of the public knew that Medicare and Medicaid take up nearly 20 to 30 percent of federal spending. Similarly, nearly half the country underestimates the size of Social Security spending. Given that Ryan’s signature policy agenda calls for restructuring these programs, for instance by reducing the government’s role in their provision through competition and consumer choice, the fact that much of the country does not recognize the threat to their long-term solvency makes that agenda a more difficult sell nationally.

The good news for the Romney campaign is that few are better positioned than Paul Ryan to explain the gravity of these issues and to make the case for reform over the status quo. A lifelong policy wonk who started reading federal budgets in high school, Ryan has not only a broad understanding of federal spending policies and their budget impact but also a unique ability to communicate the need for reforming government spending in a way that is coherent, accessible, and rich in supporting evidence. His 2010 “Roadmap for America’s Future,” an ambitious budget proposal for reforming entitlement programs and reigning in the national debt, has been the most influential factor in forcing Republicans to make these issues a top legislative priority over the past several years. Among them was Mitt Romney, who hailed Ryan’s plan as “marvelous.” Adding Ryan to the ticket makes that policy connection explicit.

---

The Promise of Paul Ryan | FrontPage Magazine

 

[Listening]

Trickle down economics. It does not work for the vast majority of voters. The polls will reflect this.

Don't quit your day job.

Your predictions and commentary are not good enough to feed your family on.

A little more analysis would be useful....but (for the left) analysis is like the Easter Bunny.....fictional.

 

[Political Junky]

13 days to GOP convention, 84 days to election -- MARK McKINNON: ROMNEY-RYAN WILL 'PROBABLY LOSE. MAYBE BIG' -- Rubio to introduce Romney in Tampa; Christie keynotes -- Livestream, 8:30 a.m. - POLITICO Playbook - POLITICO.com

“[Mark McKinnon:] ‘I think it’s a very bold choice. And an exciting and interesting pick. It’s going to elevate the campaign into a debate over big ideas. It means Romney-Ryan can run on principles and provide some real direction and vision for the Republican Party. And probably lose. Maybe big’ … [A GOP strategist:] ‘This could be the defining moment of the campaign. If they win the battle to define Medicare, then I believe Romney wins the presidency. If they lose it, then they lose big in the fall’ … ‘This is the day the music died,’ one Republican operative involved in 2012 races said after the rollout. The operative said that every House candidate now is racing to get ahead of this issue. …

 

[votetovote]

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

It was better in VA when mittens introduced Ryan as the next "President" of the United States!



I freaking loved that.. Mitts head is toast..

 

[American_Jihad]

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

It was better in VA when mittens introduced Ryan as the next "President" of the United States!



I freaking loved that.. Mitts head is toast..

BOOM YOW

VIDEO: Watch Mitt Romney, Barack Obama Introduce Their VP Picks as “President” in Slips of the Tongue
by Fox News Insider Posted in: 2012 Election, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan

VIDEO: Watch Mitt Romney, Barack Obama Introduce Their VP Picks as “President” in Slips of the Tongue | Fox News Insider

 

[Unkotare]

Hey, the last guy who made that mistake became president, so...

 

[candycorn]

It depends on how stupid Americans really are. Women are abysmally stupid, that won't change and obama will still get the stupid female vote.

And you guys wonder why people snicker at you.

 

[EriktheRed]

Since Ryan knows that Romney’s bare sketch of a plan never reaches balance, he stumbles momentarily before trying to move the conversation to his comfortable talking points about Romney’s goal of reducing spending to historic norms as a share of gross domestic product.

But Hume grows quietly impatient. He practically cuts Ryan off.

“I get that,” Hume says. “But what about balance?”

You can see Ryan flinch. He doesn’t know, he says. Why not? “I don’t want to get wonky on you,” he says, recovering, “because we haven’t run the numbers on that specific plan.” But that’s not “getting wonky” at all. As common sense (and the Gingrich/Clinton approach) suggests, there’s nothing arcane about this subject. You decide on a sensible path to balance as a goal and come up with policies that achieve it. All this means is that Romney hasn’t done what a fiscally conservative leader would do. Trying to evade this as a matter of not “getting wonky” is Ryan’s tell. He’s betting Hume is too dumb, uninterested or short on time to press the point.

Matt Miller: Recognizing Paul Ryan's "tell"when he is trying to avoid something - The Washington Post

 

[American Horse]

Since Ryan knows that Romney’s bare sketch of a plan never reaches balance, he stumbles momentarily before trying to move the conversation to his comfortable talking points about Romney’s goal of reducing spending to historic norms as a share of gross domestic product.

But Hume grows quietly impatient. He practically cuts Ryan off.

“I get that,” Hume says. “But what about balance?”

You can see Ryan flinch. He doesn’t know, he says. Why not? “I don’t want to get wonky on you,” he says, recovering, “because we haven’t run the numbers on that specific plan.” But that’s not “getting wonky” at all. As common sense (and the Gingrich/Clinton approach) suggests, there’s nothing arcane about this subject. You decide on a sensible path to balance as a goal and come up with policies that achieve it. All this means is that Romney hasn’t done what a fiscally conservative leader would do. Trying to evade this as a matter of not “getting wonky” is Ryan’s tell. He’s betting Hume is too dumb, uninterested or short on time to press the point.

Matt Miller: Recognizing Paul Ryan's "tell"when he is trying to avoid something - The Washington Post

Eric, Is that all you and Matt Miller have? Of course the plan is now going to be Rom's and not Ryan's; Rom's the candidate not Ryan, so Paul logically needs to be sure that is clear in any interview. Of course they haven't had the time to do the calculations for when the budget will come into balance; and Ryan looking to the right when faced with that question. Here's Millers comment:

Ryan then adds that “the plan that we’ve offered in the House balances the budget.” But he immediately stops short of saying when — you see his eyes dart to the right at that moment, his next tell — because that would mean admitting it reaches balance in the 2030s.

[as usual Miller, as do all Libs, wants to ignore the dynamics of any economic consideration in a free market system with incentives, which are what make it dynamic]

So the "Tell is, what ... momentarily looking to the right?

... A glance to the observer's right reveals that the subject is remembering facts. ....

And

a glance to the observer's left usually reveals a creative process -- when someone is "making up" facts or lying.

"Lying Eyes"

Let's be real; no one really knows for sure when the budget will come into balance, and the only way to get there, and even Miller said just that is "to grow the economy." The only way to grow a capitalist free market economy is with more competiton and free markets.

 

[EriktheRed]

 

[Katzndogz]

It depends on how stupid Americans really are. Women are abysmally stupid, that won't change and obama will still get the stupid female vote.

And you guys wonder why people snicker at you.

Women for the most part are abysmally stupid. Not all women, but those women won't vote for obama anyway. The kind of woman that will vote for obama are the "Julia" types. obama has at least promised to take care of them. He will make sure they have food, shelter, medical care, obama's the ultimate pimp. That's why the regime crafted the everywoman in Julia. The ones who have no independence of their own. They want a caretaker. I'll watch out of ya baby. That's what they want to hear.

By the time they figure out, the pimp isn't really going to take care of them, it's too late.

 

[thanatos144]

I fins it amusing that all the progressives have is Ryan liked Atlas Shrugged lol cause in thier ignorant minds that book is worse then the Marxist Manifesto lol

 

[EriktheRed]

I fins it amusing that all the progressives have is Ryan liked Atlas Shrugged lol cause in thier ignorant minds that book is worse then the Marxist Manifesto lol

No, what's really amusing is how he's as big a hypocrite as Rand was herself.