The Impact Of Paul Ryan On The Presidential Campaign

Yesterday Fred Barnes posted an article at the Wall Street Journal explaining how Mitt Romney‘s choice of Paul Ryan as his Vice-Presidential running mate has impacted the presidential campaign.

The choice of Paul Ryan has moved the future of Medicare to the front of the debate.

The article states:

The economy remains a central issue, as do Mr. Obama’s overall record and Mr. Romney’s past one. But now the looming fiscal crisis, Medicare, and the size and role of government are front and center of the campaign. The presidential contest has been elevated into a clash of big ideas and fundamental differences. Neither presidential candidate, but especially Mr. Obama, could have imagined this. Credit Mr. Ryan.

This shift has been damaging to the president and helpful to Mr. Romney. The slogan of Mr. Obama’s campaign is “Forward,” but he’s become the status-quo candidate. Mr. Romney, having adopted slightly revised versions of Mr. Ryan’s bold plans for reducing spending and reforming Medicare, is now the candidate of change. This might have happened to some extent without Mr. Ryan in the race, but it certainly wasn’t inevitable.

There have been a lot of personal attacks on Mitt Romney from the Obama camp during this campaign. Mitt Romney has been accused of being responsible for the cancer death of someone’s wife, insinuations have been made that there is something unseemly about his wealth, and he has been accused of all sorts of nefarious things. The addition of Paul Ryan to the ticket will not only spread out the attack–it will change to debate to actual substance.

The more Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan talk about issues, the more foolish the President’s minions look when they engage in personal attacks.

Enhanced by Zemanta

This Kind Of Logic Makes My Head Hurt

The Hill posted an article yesterday about Robert Gibbs‘ comments on Fox News Sunday.

The article reports:

Senior Obama campaign adviser Robert Gibbs defended the administration’s record on Medicare from GOP attacks on Sunday, saying that Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) should “thank President Obama” for strengthening the program.

President Obama took $716 billion out of Medicare and put it into Obamacare. I fail to see how taking money out of anything strengthens it. Does this mean that if I refuse to pay my taxes to the Internal Revenue Service I am strengthening the IRS? With Robert Gibbs’ logic, wouldn’t that be a good thing?

On Tuesday, the Washington Examiner reported:

And those health care provider cuts are not that far off under Obamacare. They start this coming January, when Medicare payments to doctors are set to be slashed by 31 percent. That’s right, by 31 percent. If you don’t think current Medicare beneficiaries are going to have trouble finding a doctor who will see them after the government starts paying those doctors 31 percent less, you probably failed Econ 101.

When Obamacare was first drafted, it did not cut Medicare spending so quickly. But to keep the final Obamacare price tag under $1 trillion, it allowed the scheduled cuts to occur. By contrast, Ryan’s Fiscal Year 2012 budget fully paid for doctor Medicare reimbursement payments.

Any senior citizen who votes for President Obama in November needs to understand that they are voting against available medical care for senior citizens in the very near future.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Fact Checking Paul Ryan’s Plan For Medicare

Fox News posted a story today about the attacks by the Obama campaign against Paul Ryan‘s plan to reform Medicare. It seems as if the plan that the Obama campaign is criticizing is not the right plan!

The article reports:

The president’s accusations largely refer to Ryan’s 2011 plan, ignoring the fact that the House Budget Committee chairman rolled out a different version in 2012 — taking into account Democratic critiques. Though the 2012 plan is more moderate, Obama and his surrogates have all but ignored the newer version as they amp up their accusations against the Romney-Ryan ticket. 

Most glaringly, the campaign has omitted a key point. 

While Ryan’s 2011 plan proposes to give seniors a government payment to buy private insurance, his 2012 plan offers seniors a choice. 

Under the blueprint, seniors could use the payment to buy private insurance or stay in traditional Medicare. 

The bottom line here is simple–Medicare is going broke. Medicare needs to be reformed in order to survive. Taking over $700 billion out of Medicare to fund Obamacare does not help Medicare. We need a serious discussion of how to fix Medicare–not rob it blind to fund more government programs.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Speaking The Truth To The People Who Are Willing To Listen

A elderly friend of mine yesterday told me that Mitt Romney hates old people and that if Mitt Romney becomes President, he will end Medicare. She was not aware of the fact that President Obama has cut Medicare about $700 billion to fund Obamacare (nor was she interested in hearing that). Unfortunately, she will vote in November. But I am not sure she is typical. There were two other senior citizens sitting with us who immediately told her the truth. She didn’t listen, but at least she heard it. That means that three of the four of us knew the truth and will vote accordingly. At least that was good news.

Scott Johnson at Power Line posted an article (and video) of Paul Ryan‘s visit to The Villages in Florida. He was accompanied by his mother, Betty Ryan Douglas.

Here is the video:

The story at Power Line includes a quote from a Power Line reader:

I was at The Villages today to hear Paul Ryan. While waiting for over 2 hours before he spoke, I was struck by conversations in the crowd. It was not about “Protecting and Strengthening Medicare.” In fact, (probably about 75% of the crowd were retirees) most of the conversations were centered on “Protecting and Strengthening America.”

People see this nation adrift! From the “You didn’t build that” comment by Obama to the recent silly Biden comments-this adds to the correct perception that the Obama Administration did not and does not have an answer to get us on the right track!

Senior citizens vote, and most have been around long enough to be able to distinguish truth from fiction. That is my hope for the 2012 election.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Truth About Medicare

Paul Ryan is not going to end Medicare. His plan leaves it intact for those of us over age 55 and changes it for younger people to insure that it will be there for them. Of course, if you watch Democrat campaign ads or see the fund raising emails, you wouldn’t know that.

John Hinderaker at Power Line posted an article today on the Democrats ad campaign regarding Medicare. He mentions the much-overlooked fact that President Obama cut $716 billion from Medicare to finance Obamacare.

The Republicans are learning–the have produced the following ad:

Facts are such inconvenient things.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Quote Of The Week

This quote is from an article posted at Townhall.com today by Guy Benson. The article deals with the lies currently being told by Debbie Wasserman Shultz (DWS) about Paul Ryan‘s plan to save Medicare.

This is the quote:

Just a reminder: I do not pick on DWS because she’s an easy target.  I hold her to account because she is Barack Obama’s hand-picked leader of his party.  She’s not a fringe player.  She’s the DNC Chairwoman, installed at the request of the president of the United States.  This seems like a good commercial for Mitt Romney: “I picked Paul Ryan.  He picked Debbie and Joe.  I’m Mitt Romney and I approve this message.”

That works for me.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Preparing For The Coming (???) Attack On Paul Ryan

Actually the attack on Paul Ryan has already begun, but here’s some ammunition for present and future attacks.

Ed Morrissey posted an article at HotAir today about Erskine Bowles‘ comments on Paul Ryan’s budget proposal. As you remember, Erskine Bowles was the co-chair of Barack Obama’s deficit committee (the one that President Obama appointed and then totally ignored the conclusions of). Erskine Bowles is a Democrat budget wonk and a presidential adviser. His committee made serious recommendations about the deficit that were not even seriously discussed by President Obama.

HotAir posted what Erskine Bowles said about Paul Ryan’s budget plan:

“Have any of you met Paul Ryan? We should get him to come to the university. I’m telling you this guy is amazing, uh. I always thought that I was OK with arithmetic, but this guy can run circles around me. And, he is honest. He is straightforward. He is sincere.

And, the budget that he came forward with is just like Paul Ryan. It is a sensible, straightforward, serious budget and it cut the budget deficit by $4 trillion…just like we did.

The President came out with his own plan and the President came out, as you will remember, with a budget and I don’t think anyone took that budget very seriously. Um, the Senate voted against it 97 to nothing. He, therefore, after a lot of pressure from folks like me, he came out with a new budget framework and, in the new budget framework, he cut the budget deficit by $4 trillion over 12 years. And, to be candid, this $4 trillion cut was very heavily back-end loaded. So, if you looked at it on a 10 year basis and compared apples-to-apples, it was about a $2.5 trillion cut.”

Erskine Bowles did not come out in support of Paul Ryan’s budget, but his statement shows an obvious respect for the budget (and for Paul Ryan). At some point we have to stop accusing people of pushing granny over a cliff and actually start looking at where we are and what we need to do to avoid going over the cliff ourselves. I believe Paul Ryan would be a wonderful person to lead that discussion.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Can Cold Hard Facts Beat Out Name Calling ?

This week on Fox News Sunday DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz provided a preview of the attack aimed at the Romney-Ryan ticket. She repeatedly called Paul Ryan‘s budget proposals extreme (while conveniently not mentioning that it has been more than three years since the Democrats made a serious budget proposal) and stated that reducing spending by any significant amount would harm the fragile recovery. (Recovery???)That is the preview of what is to come.

Michael Barone posted an article at the Washington Examiner today explaining that the choice of Paul Ryan as the Vice Presidential candidate puts the entitlement crisis at the center of the presidential campaign. At this point I would like to state that Social Security is not an entitlement–the people who will be collecting Social Security from this point on have paid more into the program than they will get out. The problem is not Social Security–it is the fact that since the mid 1960’s, Congress has spent the money that was supposed to be set aside for Social Security on other things. However, Medicaid and Medicare spending has increased so dramatically above what was originally projected, that there is no way to cover the rising costs without major modifications to the programs. Social Security also needs to be modified, but again, I resent calling it an entitlement when I was forced to pay into it my entire working life.

Michael Barone’s article concludes:

For Ryan and Romney can make the point — lost in the shuffle when this is a low-visibility issue — that their plan leaves the current Medicare system in place for current recipients and those over 55. Those who have made plans based on the present program can continue to rely on it.

But they can also make the point that their reforms are necessary in order to make sure Medicare is sustainable in the long run. Polls show that many voters under 55 doubt that they’ll ever get the Medicare and Social Security benefits they’ve been promised.

One more thing about Ryan, I think, appealed to Romney. He has already shown he cannot be intimidated by the most eminent opponent. Watch the video of Ryan’s five-minute evisceration of Obamacare at the president’s Blair House meeting. You can tell that Obama didn’t like it one bit.

He better get used to it. Obama’s side is relying on trash-talking ads. Romney’s selection of Ryan shows he wants a debate on whether America should follow Obama on the road to a European-style welfare state.

Make up some popcorn, there is going to be a show!

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Change Of Pace For The Weekend

This is going to be a politically noisy weekend. The left will be trying to define Paul Ryan as wanting to drive granny off the cliff and the right will be countering that effort. Some of the stories may be interesting, informative or entertaining, but right now I am taking a break.

 

This is Frito. He is our current foster cat. We provide foster care for cats from the local no-kill cat shelter. Frito is from Guatemala. I don’t know the full story of how he got here, but evidently as a black cat he was at some risk in that country and was brought here to safety. Frito is about three years old and he is very cute. He will make someone a wonderful pet.

What is my point? We are in the midst of the political silly season. A lot of the things we see and hear are not attractive, useful, or true. We need to remember that in the midst of making an informed decision about who we want to run our country, we have other basic priorities. Remember to love your friends and family during this time, even if you disagree with their politics!

Enhanced by Zemanta

One Of Many Reasons I Support Paul Ryan For Vice President

There are many reasons I support Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney‘s choice for Vice-President. This YouTube video is one of them:

Paul Ryan is like the nerd who sat behind you in Physics class in high school, understood everything the teacher said, and could explain it in less than 25 words. He is a humble, but strong, man who understands how numbers work and how the Washington numbers game is played. I seriously doubt anyone in Congress would even try to double talk him on any budget issue.

This is a great choice that will inflame the liberals in the Democrat party. I can’t wait for the debate between Paul Ryan and Joe Biden!

Enhanced by Zemanta

Picking Winners And Losers With The Tax Code

One of the things that would be really good about passing Paul Ryan’s budget plan (it won’t happen–but it would be really good) would be that the government would lose its power to pick winners and losers in the American economy. That’s one of the reasons Paul Ryan’s budget will never pass–Congress and the President do not want to give up the power to control people through the tax code. However, every now and then, someone in the Senate actually does something smart in terms of taxes. The Senate (in a 51-47 vote)  has nixed the President’s plan to raise taxes on oil companies (which of course would raise the price of gasoline at the pump).

The New American posted a few thoughts on the Senate vote today:

“This bill is pretty simple: we end wasteful subsidies to the big five oil companies and we use those proceeds to invest in clean energy, in creating jobs, and reducing the deficit,” Menendez said Monday when introducing the bill. “I think the American people are sick and tired of paying ridiculously high gasoline prices at the pump and then paying big oil again with … taxpayer subsidies.”

However, as Bob Adelman asserted last May in The New American, there is a grave difference between tax breaks and what Obama and Menendez characterize as “subsidies.” “The echo chamber of the mainstream media and liberal Democrats merely confirms their attempt to confuse the issue to promote their agenda,” Adelman affirmed. “Subsidies and tax breaks are different entities entirely, and getting the terms wrong means getting it all wrong.”

As stated above–these are not subsidies–subsidies are what we are paying to alternative energy companies that keep going broke or shipping their business to China. Not only are these not subsidies–they are tax breaks that all companies routinely get.

The article concludes:

But Menendez goes a step further, and calls the oil tax breaks “wasteful subsidies.” Is this contrary to the clean-energy industry’s un-wasteful subsidies? Obama’s Energy Department has dished out billions of dollars in “green” subsidies, to companies like SpectraWatt, Eastern Energy, Beacon Power, Evergreen Solar, and the controversial Solyndra — which all ended up in bankruptcy. These five companies, along with seven others, are now in financial disarray, after collectively reaping more than $6.5 billion in taxpayer-backed government assistance.

In effect, one might suggest that Obama and Menendez are pointing their fingers in the wrong direction.

The Obama Administration has never actually had a successful energy policy. It is unrealistic to think that they will develop one at this point.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Yesterday’s House Of Representatives Vote On President Obama’s Budget

Yesterday the Washington Times reported that President Obama’s proposed budget was voted on in the House of Representatives. The vote was 414 to 0. Even the Democrats in the House did not support the proposal.

The article reports:

The vote came as the House worked its way through its own fiscal year 2013 budget proposal, written by Budget Committee Chairman Paul D. Ryan. Republicans wrote an amendment that contained Mr. Obama’s budget and offered it on the floor, daring Democrats to back the plan, which calls for major tax increases and yet still adds trillions of dollars to the deficit over the next decade.

Why is it that no Democrat was willing to go on the record in support of the President’s budget proposal?

The Senate has already stated that they will not bring a budget proposal to the floor this year–despite the fact that they are required by law to pass a budget. It is truly sad that the Democrats in Congress do not have the backbone to stand up for their convictions. If they believe that higher taxes and increased spending will help the economy, why are they unwilling to vote as they believe? I happen to disagree with that idea, but if the Democrats in Congress believe it, why don’t they act on their belief?

Enhanced by Zemanta

This Really Doesn’t Sound Like A Plan

Hot Air posted a video today of some of the Congressional hearings on the President’s proposed budget. The clip they posted is of Paul Ryan asking United States Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner what the President’s budget does to help end future deficit spending. I strongly suggest that you follow the link and watch the video.

There is a great quote in the video:

Geithner states, “We’re not coming before you today to say that we have a definitive solution to the long term problem, what we do know is we don’t like yours.”

In other words, why, no, our new budget does nothing to address America’s long-term fiscal crisis.

If our current administration is not willing to address America’s long-term fiscal crisis, let’s elect an administration that will be.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Two Congressmen Trying To Get It Right

Today’s Wall Street Journal (no link–subscribers only) posted an article on their Opinion Page written by Senator Ron Wyden and Representative Paul Ryan. The two Congressmen have worked together to design a plan that will ensure the future of Medicare. My experience in watching Representative Ryan is that he is a true geek on the subject of Congressional spending. I am not familiar with Senator Wyden, but I suspect he is also strong on the subject.

The basic outline of the Medicare proposal is that it would not effect people under the age of 55 and that it would include the toughest consumer protections in American government. Part of the plan is a ‘premium support’ system that would allow Medicare users to choose between a government and a private plan. There would be conditions in place to make sure the private plans provided the same service as the government plan.

The article concludes:

Yes, these are ambitious reforms, and while we are hopeful for the future, we are under no illusions that they will pass tomorrow. Nevertheless, we offer this plan as proof that Democrats and Republicans don’t have to spend next year making Medicare reform more difficult. Instead, our parties can work together on bipartisan reforms to save and strengthen Medicare.

I have no idea what Congress will do with this plan. It is, however, extremely encouraging to see the sort of co-operation that this plan represents. When members of Congress from both parties work together, America wins.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Fear Mongering For Fun And Profit

Yesterday’s Washington Examiner posted an editorial by the newspaper staff on the practice of using fear to block Republican attempts to cut the federal budget.

The editorial states:

“To be a little melodramatic, the budget would kill people,” New York Times columnist Paul Krugman recently told CNN about House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan’s Path to Prosperity. “No question.” With the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s disaster relief fund set to run out of money Thursday, and with none of the federal government’s 12 appropriations bills signed into law so far, you can expect a lot more melodramatic quotes like this one in the coming weeks.

Oddly enough, when faced with a Congress that was not going to give it more money, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) discovered that it actually did have enough money to finish the fiscal year.

The editorial reminds us that sixteen years ago, when the Republican Congress was debating welfare reform, Bob Herbert in the New York Times warned its readers that welfare reform “would hurt many people, would kill some and would help no one.”

The editorial at the Washington Examiner reviews the history:

Herbert could not have been much farther from the mark. Two years later, after President Clinton had signed welfare reform into law, New York Times journalist Jason DeParle reported that “welfare rolls have fallen more than 40 percent in three states that have been among the most energetic in urging recipients to work: Oregon, Wisconsin and Indiana. And caseloads have declined by 25 percent or more in 16 other states.” DeParle’s article said nothing about people dying in the streets of Portland, Milwaukee or Indianapolis.

Please follow the link to the Washington Examiner editorial for more examples of using fear to avoid reducing the size of the federal government. The cure for fear is knowledge, and it is time for American voters to understand the negative impact on America of an ever-increasing government.

Enhanced by Zemanta