Conservatives are not fired up about Ryan

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Veep Pick Paul Ryan Is No Conservative

No sooner had Mitt Romney's choice of Paul Ryan as his running mate become known than the world of punditry was abuzz with talk of "Ryanmania." Since mania is by definition an excessive or unreasonable enthusiasm, the label may be regarded as an understatement. For while the seven-term Republican congressman from Wisconsin and chairman of the House Budget Committee is not yet a household name across America, he does generate excitement within the "conservative movement," an excitement and enthusiasm that suggests the talking heads at Fox News and the dot.com warriors at The Weekly Standard have no more sense of conservative, constitutional government than the cheering chanting crowd of Republican partisans who greeted the vice presidential hopeful in Norfolk, Virginia, Saturday morning.

Like him or not, the one thing politically aware Americans are supposed to know about Paul Ryan is that he is a fiscal conservative, a bold budget hawk. He is, after all, the prime author of the House budget plan (titled "the Path to Prosperity") to repeal the Obama health insurance program ("ObamaCare"), turn the Medicaid program for low-income Americans over to the states and create a private insurance option for Medicare beneficiaries starting in 2023. The plan would also turn food stamps and other federal programs for the poor into block grants to the states, with limits on the growth of those programs. If Republican voters have any doubts about Ryan's commitment to budget austerity, they need only hear the Democrats' outcry that Ryan's "Path to Prosperity" will be a road to the poorhouse for elderly and low-income Americans.

But on the other side of the ledger, Ryan's voting record shows a robust support of big-spending programs to enlarge the role of the federal government, especially when they are promoted by a Republican in the White House. Ryan voted for all of the big-ticket, budget-busting items of the administration of President George W. Bush, including the No Child Left Behind Act and the prescription drug benefit known as Medicare Part D, often described as the largest expansion of the welfare state since Lyndon Johnson's Great Society. Ryan voted to create the new Department of Homeland Security, including the Transportation Security Administration that has harassed air travelers, while making aircraft safe from shoes, belt buckles and grandma's knitting needles. He voted for the PATRIOT Act, giving government enhanced powers for warrantless snooping into the lives of American citizens as well as foreign nationals. Ryan voted for the Troubled Assets Relief Program that bailed out the "too big to fail" financial institutions and inspired the Tea Party rebellion against big government and "crony capitalism." He backed the auto bailout that turned GM into "Government Motors."

And while conservatives generally like to leave wars and military spending off the list of costly "big government" programs, Ryan's record on that front is also troubling. Like Romney, Ryan has no foreign policy credentials and no record of military service to point to in the election campaign. And like Romney, Ryan swallowed whole the Bush-Cheney line on Iraq and supported the decision to invade and occupy that country in a needless war that cost more than 4,000 American and hundreds of thousands Iraqi lives and has added roughly a trillion dollars to our soaring national debt. Ryan's budget calls for no reduction in military spending, despite the continued presence of U.S. troops in some 130 countries around the world, most of which have no bearing on our own national security.

Even more troubling is Ryan's vote last December in favor of the National Defense Authorization Act. The legislation included a provision authorizing the president to use the military to arrest suspected terrorists, including American citizens apprehended in the United States, and hold them indefinitely, without charges and without trial, in clear violation of due process rights guaranteed by the Constitution. This year Ryan voted against an amendment to remove that provision from the law.

Ryan did vote against reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank, which grants loans and loan guarantees to foreign governments and businesses for the purchase of U.S. products. But his vote last year for the $915 billion Omnibus Appropriations Bill for 2012 went to support further spending on housing, education, foreign aid, and other programs for which there is no constitutional role for the federal government. On The New American magazine's latest Freedom Index, matching congressional votes with the strictures of the Constitution, Ryan's rating for the 112th Congress to date was an anemic 67 percent.

Paul Ryan is, in short, a typical Bush-era Republican, whose selection as a vice presidential candidate is being trumpeted as a triumph by many of the same Republicans who are doing their best to flush the administration of George W. Bush down the memory hole. Republican candidates almost never invoke the Bush name and the most recent Republican President will not be attending the party's convention in Tampa, where Romney and Ryan are expected to be officially nominated. Chances are the name of the 43rd president will be mentioned in rare fleeting reference, if at all. Yet in his choice of running mate, Romney has chosen a loyal Bush Republican and reliable supporter of the programs and policies that made the Bush administration an anathema to genuine conservatives and an embarrassment to the nation.

Finally, the Ryan budget, while including a number of unspecified cuts in entitlement programs, would push overall spending higher than current levels. Despite its optimistic revenue projections, the Congressional Budget Office projects the Ryan plan will lead to a balanced budget by 2040.That suggests a rousing slogan for the Romney-Ryan ticket: "Slightly Less Socialism and a Balanced Budget in 28 Years."

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/12432-veep-pick-paul-ryan-is-no-conservative

Yep. From what I have seen from my conservative facebook friends, they are not convinced Ryan is as appealing as the Obama Attack Machine makes him out to be.

Edited August 13, 2012 by The Patriot

[X Factor 1,110]

His age is also being called into question. I.E he is too young.

Edited August 13, 2012 by kennard

[JohnR! 5,495]

His age is also being called into question. I.E he is too young.

Not to mention the information on inside trading.

My conservative friends are disappointed that the GOP abandoned them.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

His age is also being called into question. I.E he is too young.

And he is a Catholic. The similarities to JFK are alarming.

[DaveE 178]

Who knows, seems like everyone has a different opinion:

"Paul Ryan’s selection electrifies GOP grassroots"

Grass roots fired up

[X Factor 1,110]

And he is a Catholic. The similarities to JFK are alarming.

All we are missing now is someone comparable to Marilyn Monroe for him to have an affair with

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Who knows, seems like everyone has a different opinion:

"Paul Ryan’s selection electrifies GOP grassroots"

Grass roots fired up

Pure spin.

Paul Ryan on Bailouts and Government Stimuli

-Voted YES on TARP (2008)

-Voted YES on Economic Stimulus HR 5140 (2008)

-Voted YES on $15B bailout for GM and Chrysler. (Dec 2008)

-Voted YES on $192B additional anti-recession stimulus spending. (Jul 2009)

Paul Ryan on Entitlement Programs

-Voted YES on limited prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients. (Nov 2003)

-Voted YES on providing $70 million for Section 8 Housing vouchers. (Jun 2006)

-Voted YES on extending unemployment benefits from 39 weeks to 59 weeks. (Oct 2008)

-Voted YES on Head Start Act (2007)

Paul Ryan on Education

Rep. Ryan went along with the Bush Administration in supporting more federal involvement in education. This is contrary to the traditional Republican position, which included support for abolition of the Department of Education and decreasing federal involvement in education.

-Voted YES on No Child Left Behind Act (2001)

Paul Ryan on Civil Liberties

-Voted YES on federalizing rules for driver licenses to hinder terrorists. (Feb 2005)

-Voted YES on making the PATRIOT Act permanent. (Dec 2005)

-Voted YES on allowing electronic surveillance without a warrant. (Sep 2006)

Paul Ryan on War and Intervention Abroad

-Voted YES on authorizing military force in Iraq. (Oct 2002)

-Voted YES on emergency $78B for war in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Apr 2003)

-Voted YES on declaring Iraq part of War on Terror with no exit date. (Jun 2006)

-Voted NO on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days. (May 2007)

Congressman Ryan supports the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, federal bailouts, increased federal involvement in education, unconstitutional and undeclared wars, Medicare Part D (a multi trillion dollar unfunded liability), stimulus spending, and foreign aid.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Romney/Ryan 2012: Slightly Less Socialism and a Balanced Budget in 28 Years

[mawilson 2,133]

I like Ryan. The only issue I care about is the debt/deficit, and Ryan is the only politician who had the guts to propose a Medicare reform. As plans go, his was pretty wimpy, but it's still better than no plan, or Obama's plan to leave the Big Three (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid) alone, spend more and bankrupt the country even sooner.

[^_^ 5,021]

All we are missing now is someone comparable to Marilyn Monroe for him to have an affair with

The way Republicans of this era are, his Marilyn Monroe is likely to be a guy.

[X Factor 1,110]

The way Republicans of this era are, his Marilyn Monroe is likely to be a guy.

He appeals to the common guy - so his Marilyn Monroe guy might be a common guy

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I like Ryan. The only issue I care about is the debt/deficit, ...

Wouldn't that mean that you would want to see a blueprint that manages to balance the budget in less than a quarter century and w/o having to resort to unreasonable assumptions? I mean, 2.8% unemployment? Non-entitlement spending - including defense - at 3.75% of GDP? Really? That's not realistic. Romney wants to push defense alone over 4% of GDP. It hasn't been below 3.5% in decades. So, what does that mean? Romney doesn't get his 4%+? Hardly. There's panic right now that spending cuts looming for DoD are devastating and need to be halted. And they will be. Given that reality, are we suggesting that there will be no federal spending other than entitlements and defense? If you believe that, I've got bridges for sale.

The Ryan blue print neither balances the budget nor addresses the mounting debt. Not in the near term, not in the medium term and not in the long run. It doesn't do it. All it is is a new round of starving the beast - the very concept that has failed to reign in government spending for well over three decades.

[mawilson 2,133]

The Ryan blue print neither balances the budget nor addresses the mounting debt.

At least he's trying. Obama is not even trying.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

At least he's trying. Obama is not even trying.

I don't think he is. He's doing another round of starve the beast - the very strategy that has set the stage for huge deficits and left us with the mountain of debt we've accumulated since it was first introduced.

[rocks 494]

At least he's trying. Obama is not even trying.

Trying? Trying what? To deprive women of their rights?