"America deserves a choice."
Here's a snippet of what GOP House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan said in tonight's big speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington. Via the Washington Examiner:
Everybody knows this is politically risky territory. Republicans have their battle scars on entitlement reform. That's why some argue that we should downplay bold agendas and simply wage a campaign focused solely on the President and his party.
I firmly disagree. Boldness and clarity offer the greatest opportunity to create a winning coalition. We will not only win the next election – we have a unique opportunity to sweep and remake the political landscape.
Of course we will highlight the President's failed agenda. But Americans deserve to choose an alternative agenda – one that aligns with our needs. One we can rally behind.
…My friends, America deserves a choice – and if it is an honest choice between these two visions, well, then we win, they lose.
Yes, the challenge before us is daunting. The President and his allies will do all in their power to try to make our philosophy of freedom seem radical.
But I believe the President and his party's leaders are profoundly mistaken.
They are growing increasingly isolated from the American mainstream. They just don't understand that Americans are seeking political leaders whose solutions are reassuring precisely because they are bold.
The President's partisans are underestimating the ability of Americans to do basic math. They don't realize that the sheer magnitude of our challenges has shifted the center of gravity under their feet, putting them at a disadvantage. The history of our own movement shows that we can win these fights – if we are willing to fight them.
As constitutional conservatives, let's offer Americans the choice they deserve. This is the moment we were made for. It is time to prove that the Founders got it right, both for centuries past and for centuries to come.
Let's contrast the President's path to decline with our own path that lifts the debt, promotes prosperity, and restores the greatness of the American Idea.
Ryan has been delivering similar messages—be specific, be bold, take risks—for a while. But it's hard to avoid seeing this speech as a challenge, and perhaps a warning, to all of the potential Republican presidential nominees, and to Mitt Romney in particular.
Read my 2010 feature, "Paul Ryan: Radical or Sellout?"
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
A warning? Bah! We don't need no stinking warnings.
I found a great dating bisexual site DATEBI*C'O'M. It is a serious& safe dating site for the bisexual and bi-
curious individuals to meet in a friendly and comfortable environment. It hopes that all members can make new
friends and establish romantic relationships. I have to say DATEBI*COM the best site I have ever joined so far.
They verify all members. Unlike other sites,NO scammers or fake profiles here, and you can meet many rich or mature
women as well, including celebs, famous stars.BEST OF LUCK!
I could see him swooping in at a brokered convention. He's good.
"Let's be bold. Let's take risks."
The Republicans won in 2010 by promising 1) to cut taxes and 2) not to cut a dime from Medicare, ever. How is that bold? Let's see Ryan promise to cut the defense budget to where it was in 2000, when it was already too high. Let's see him eliminate farm subsidies, etc., etc. Ryan believes his own press clippings, that's all.
They shouldn't even let Paul "TARP-boy" Ryan through the door at CPAC (Did he show up driving a Chevy Volt?). This is what happens when the establishment party-hacks take over.
Yep. Paul Ryan is a perfect example of a TEAM RED fuckstick who talks a big game about freedom and limited government and then acts the opposite. Fuck him and fuck all the TEAM RED assholes who think he's the future of the party.
I'll still take him over Romneybot, I'll pick that wimpy road map any day over Romney's non-existant entitlement plan.
Fortunately no matter what happens in the future you'll never have to pick Ryan. You will always have the choice to not vote for him or defend his big government record. And Romney, unlike Ryan, does not have a voting record of expanding Federal entitlements. So in fact Romneys record is better than Ryan's on the one issue you focused on.
Jack Ryan was a bad president?
Seriously? Because he wasn't in Congress to cast a vote he gets a pass. That's bullshit.
While Congress was passing Medicare Part D (by the way does everyone who voted for it get disqualified from being taken seriously for President?), Romney was busy doing his best to expand state healthcare entitlements in Mass, and laying the groundwork for the largest entitlemnt program since the '60s. But yeah, just keep telling yourself that his record is "better." I don't know what makes you think he would have been a vote against it Part D (that's what you insinuate by saying his record is better).
Anyone who voted for Medicare Part D should be disqualified from being painted as a budget hawk.
No one thinks Romney is a budget hawk, so his MassCare rap sheet isn't as big a deal as Ryan's TARP and MedicarePtD history.
I'm not defending Romney. I'm saying his pathetic record is better than Ryan's which makes them both terrible. And yes anyone who voted for Medicare Part D shouldn't be eligible for the presidency.
He voted for Medicare Part D too.
Paulie Blue Eyes became a deficit hawk on 1/20/2009 like much of the GOP.
TARP-boy took a little longer to "get religion". Ryan voted for the Obama auto bailouts.
googled paul ryan chevy volt and dont see a thing about it.
TARP -> GMAC bailout -> Chevrolet -> Volt.
TARP-boy voted for the "Obama" auto bailouts as well. He's a bipartisan Big Government kinda guy.
and what's with that lame hair! lame.
Given that a Ron Paul victory would likely bring the racial demagoguery by Democrats to a new level, I think a brokered convention is the best possible outcome.
See? A nation of cowards.
Just an observation. The poison-tipped knives would be out and I don't think he'd survive.
HODOR?
Corn?
Of course we will highlight the President's failed agenda. But Americans deserve to choose an alternative agenda ? one that aligns with our needs. One we can rally behind.
Oh my goodness, no. Vague promises peppered throughout platitudinal speeches, that's how you win elections.
"Cheap fabric and dim lighting. That's how you move merchandise."
That's how you get impeached as condo president.
I thought it was using Condo fees to buy a Caddy?
And going out for dinner after 4:30.
Buying everyone Willards for tip computation doesn't look good either.
One time Hitler farted and a bunch of dead babies fell out, and he was like, "wtf, where did all of these dead babies come from?!" and Paris Hilton vagina. Also sodomy.
OH LORDY, What did Tim Thomas post on facebook now?
A lot of coverage of CPAC up in here. So when MNG (picking random liberal, he may have never said anything like this) says we're just Republicans who want to get stoned, what are we suppose to say in turn?
puff, puff, pass?
That might distract them, yes, that will work as far it goes. Main thing though, does anyone know of a detergent that cleans off the oiliness when you associate too closely with Paul Ryan as Reason is known to do? What's the one they used to clean the birds in Alaska after The Valdez Incident?
My main rule, you voted TARP, you dirty. I would shake Dennis Kucinich's hand before I would Paul Ryan.
I wouldn't shake either of their hands.
Just so we understand, this is purely a matter of TARP, nothing else. I'm not suggesting liberaltarian anything.
Do Democrats have a similar conference, and does it feature anyone who espouses views that libertarians might not find horrible? If so, we can see if Reason covered it.
Bear in mind that the most interesting news out of CPAC the last couple of years was Ron Paul winning their straw poll.
They did not even invite him to speak this year. The man who won previous straw polls. Even more reason for libertarians not to give this bunch the time of day.
Now watch him win their straw poll this year, regardless.
I thought he skipped it on his own because he wanted to campaign instead.
I've seen a bit of speculation on the back story, and no confirmation that he was actually invited. If he was, that wold have been an element of the story. The changing of the guard from ideologues to partisan campaigners at CSPAN indicates to me that there is likely frisson as well. It would be odd for him to skip it, as the CPAC event is more valuable time (with national coverage on CSPAN) than any two or three campaign events he would have missed to go there.
Do Democrats have a similar conference,
The MLA conference, perhaps?
Yes! Boldness! The kind of boldness that offers up a plan to balance the budget in the 40 years!
Yes! The boldness of a plan where someone else balances the budget, far far in the future.
Ouch! Ouch! Goddammit!
Sir Humphrey: If you want to be really sure that the Minister doesn't accept it, you must say the decision is "courageous".
Bernard: And that's worse than "controversial"?
Sir Humphrey: Oh, yes! "Controversial" only means "this will lose you votes". "Courageous" means "this will lose you the election"!
He is right about bold and clear...but deserve?
Americans will deserve their freedom when they are good and bloody from fighting for it.
Now hey man. Everybody knows libertarians aren't into war and stuff. So cool it, or they'll accuse you of being one of those immoral war-monger typer peoples that they really hate a lot.
We'll only be free once we get shot in the face?
Be patient, Pax. My minions will get around to shooting you in the face, soon as I win this election.
Can you at least promise me it will be done by a SEAL Team? I at the very least deserve to go out like Jesse James and Osama bin Laden. Don't pretend you haven't noticed my handy work. The dude who gave that ticket cam the finger at the Intersection of MLK Drive and Patterson, that was me bitches.
There are other ways of drawing blood if you please.
Deserve's got nothin' to do with it.
http://www.salon.com/2012/02/0.....singleton/
Indeed: is there even a single liberal pundit, blogger or commentator who would have defended George Bush and Dick Cheney if they (rather than Obama) had been secretly targeting American citizens for execution without due process, or slaughtering children, rescuers and funeral attendees with drones, or continuing indefinite detention even a full decade after 9/11? Please. How any of these people can even look in the mirror, behold the oozing, limitless intellectual dishonesty, and not want to smash what they see is truly mystifying to me.
And once again, GG is the only one on the left to give enough of a shit about his values to call his own people repulsive.
A lot of people in the comments are pulling a Scotsman though, and denying that anyone who supports these things is a "real" liberal.
So that would make it RINOs vs. DINOs, then, I guess.
They've transitioned from campaigning to governing.
"When I was Spiderman, I would just create a tritium containment field, like this, and then...Blue Steel!"
Everybody gets one.
Ryan's trying on Rand Paul's branding? Ok, but will he back it up?
-jcr
Don't know, but they say he looks good in a suit. What else were you looking for?
it's confusing because they all have first names for their last names.
Just need say : very nice
good
I must congratulate you Mr Suderman on using the exact right alt-text to capture the creepy evil that that picture conveys. I can hear that song being sung by a little 6 year old girl while she plinks away the tune on her kiddie piano, just like in all the good old horror movies.