Change? Obama Worse than Bush

The verdict is in, and Barack Obama did not produce the change he promised.  In fact, as he blames all his ills on the last 8 years, it is interesting to compare the Bush years to the Obama years.  Consider the following:

Average Annual Increase in Public Debt (in millions):

Bush: $543,818        Obama: $1,497,601

Total Increase in Public Debt (in millions):

Bush (8 years): $4,217,261   Obama (4 years): $5,990,407

Average Annual Unemployment (Also see here):

Bush: 5.26%                    Obama: 9.2%

Median Household Incomes:

January, 2009: $55,198       August, 2012: $50,678

The Average Annual Price of Gas (not even including 2012):

Bush: $2.14                     Obama: $2.89

Cost of Higher Education (adj. for inflation, not even including 2012):

Bush 2008: $16,661     Obama 2011: $18,497

But isn’t health insurance cheaper now with Obamacare?  No.  In 2012 the amount a family with employer provided coverage pays in annual premiums has increased to about $16,000.  For families with private individual plans, the amount is up to $5,615.  And before you ask why families don’t all just switch to private individual plans, remember that Obamacare taxes medium-large businesses up to $3,000 per employee that they don’t cover.

But we know Obama has handled the economy terribly.  The other thing people elected Obama for was to end the wars.  Obama promised to close Gitmo, which didn’t happen, and to end the war in Iraq.  He ended the war in Iraq by sticking to Bush’s timeline, but that wasn’t the whole story.  Obama intended to continue the war and leave troops in Iraq, but Biden could not negotiate simple immunity for our troops.  Don’t look now, but the Afghanistan war isn’t ending in 2014.  The administration is already negotiating to keep up to 25,000 troops in Afghanistan after 2014.

Let’s look at war by the numbers.

Involvement in Major Foreign Conflicts:

Bush: 2 countries           Obama: 3 countries

Military Spending as % of GDP:

Bush, 2008: 4.4%          Obama, 2011: 4.7%

Average Annual War Spending:

Bush: $99.3 Billion       Obama: $155.1 Billion

Obama boasts of ending the war in Iraq, but how is the peace President doing in Afghanistan?

Average Annual Troop Deaths:

Bush: 606                        Obama: 445

Iraq:  528                         66

Afghanistan: 78              379

But what about Bush’s handling of Katrina?  Surely Obama has done better than that, right?  Former NYC Mayor Guiliani says no.

What about taxes?  Obama boasts about cutting people’s taxes, but most of the tax hikes he passed don’t go into effect until next year.  Obamacare has 20 different tax hikes in it, and many of those affect the poor and the sick.

But Obama saved the auto industry, right?  Actually, the only Detroit major that survived was Ford.  Ford didn’t take Obama’s bailout.  Chrysler did, and is now owned by an Italian company called Fiat.  GM took Obama’s bailout and is now owned by the taxpayers.  This was after Obama spent billions to bailout the unions before letting the two companies go through bankruptcy.  If that’s Obama saving the auto industry, I hope he doesn’t do me any favors.

Add these factors to Benghazi, Fast and Furious, the Black Panther polling case, Solyndra, and the other various scandals and overreaches of the Obama administration, and there is no reason to re-elect Obama.  Except of course if you got an Obama phone and are afraid of losing it.

How Obama Could Still Win:

Several states in play are ties or tossups in the latest polls.  In some, Obama is leading by 3-5%, but 3-5% are either undecided or going third party.  Obama can still win, even with his horrible statistics, if people vote third party or stay home.

I know many out there are voting third party or not voting to protest Romney.  I, like you, am a very libertarian leaning constitutionalist.  I’d love to see us out of the Middle East.  I’d love to see government spending cut in half.  I’d love to see us hold to our 10th amendment.  But Mitt Romney is NOT Barack Obama.

If anything, Mitt Romney is far closer to Reagan.  Despite being hailed as a conservative hero, Reagan is not as conservative as I would have preferred.  In fact, many Ron Paul and Gary Johnson voters would probably not vote for Reagan either.  But Mitt Romney is not the candidate you should be protesting.  You should be protesting Barack Obama.

Consider your goals and which candidate will get us there:

Less involvement in the Middle East: Mitt Romney has a comprehensive energy plan that gets America using its own resources to lower our dependence on OPEC.  Obama spent billions of your tax dollars on green energy companies that went bankrupt, and we are no closer to independence from foreign oil.

Simpler, fairer tax system: Romney’s plan reduces rates in order to remove loopholes and deductions based on the government’s definition of what a good citizen looks like without raising taxes.  Obama’s plan is higher taxes, more redistribution and a more complex tax system designed to pick winners and losers.

Foreign wars: Obama has proven himself to be an interventionalist.  He is not the peace President people hoped for.  He hasn’t closed Gitmo.  He only left Iraq because he was too incompetent to negotiate a way to stay there.  But he is already negotiating to keep 25,000 troops in Afghanistan.  Romney’s approach is to show the kind of strength Reagan did.  What major war did we fight when Reagan was President?  The Cold War, where we sat across the ocean from each other and didn’t pull the trigger for eight years.  Finally, the Soviet Union collapsed under their economic system.

More personal freedom and responsibility: Nothing took us backwards further as a nation than Obamacare.  Obamacare mandates that every American buy private health insurance or pay a tax.  Obamacare takes deciding power away from doctors and patients and gives it to the government.  If you protest Romney, Obamacare is here to stay.  If you vote to protest Obama, we have a shot at repealing this monstrous tax on the sick and the poor.

Does My Vote Count?

If you are thinking of voting third party or not voting because Romney is not as conservative as you’d like, you could be part of the margin that gives Obama four more years to take us down the path towards socialism at hyperspeed.  So where does Romney need your vote the most:

Virginia, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Florida, Nevada, Colorado, Indiana, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, New Mexico, Arizona.

But believe it or not, he also needs you in Oregon, Minnesota, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Maine. If nothing else, vote to tell the liberals in your state that they do not have a mandate.  The country is changing and is leaning to the right.  You will never get the conservative, limited government you want if you let the country fall off the socialist cliff because the most conservative candidate who can win is not conservative enough for you.

When you walk into the voting booth, consider what you want America to look like in 2016.  Do you want to move forward the way Obama does?  Do you really want four more years of this?

Why Ryan Is A Strong Choice For VP

Saturday morning, Romney announced his VP pick to be Ryan — no, not Ryan Seacrest — Paul Ryan, budget wizard and Wisconsin representative. Ryan is arguably the most prominent Republican in the House. He is young (42), personable and energetic and has over a decade in Congress. He knows how Washington works and why it doesn’t.

Also, like Romney, he appears to be clean. Everyone has skeletons, especially politicians, but as far as anyone knows to date, the Romney-Ryan ticket may be the cleanest duo since Batman and Robin. It would be a surprise if a real scandal related to either man was uncovered. This may not win them an election but it should win them some fence-sitters.

Ryan is considered the go-to-guy regarding the budget. Nobody in Congress possesses the detailed knowledge he does which is why he chairs the House Budget Committee.

Ryan also knows how to campaign, in fact, he’s never lost an election. He’s 7-0. He has successfully defended his seat against both Democrats and Libertarians. During his first campaign Ryan received 57% of the vote. This is the lowest of his career. Since, he has never dipped below 63%, typically pulling in 67-68% range. In 2010 he earned 68% of the vote.

He is one of the three co-founders of the Young Guns Program, an electoral recruitment and campaign effort by House Republicans. He, along with Rubio, Walker, and other young conservatives is symbolic of the future for the Republican party.

But like all of us, Ryan is not perfect.

He has been on Romney’s short list for months so there’s no doubt the Left has a dossier and media packet on Ryan already prepared for shipping. The Left will also unroll articles comparing Ryan to other short-list folks like Portman (much more “real” experience) or Rubio (could have delivered Florida) to make Ryan appear a weaker pick than he is.

A lack of foreign policy experience will be something the Left tries to exploit. This will create a few headlines but Republicans should be capable of over-coming the criticism by pointing out this election is more about getting our house in order than world affairs. Besides, Obama had no foreign policy credentials a few years back and he was running for the top spot, not VP.

Ryan has proposed an aggressive plan that includes substantial changes to entitlements. Obama mocked it on live television — with Ryan seated in the front row — and the Democrats have already sliced and diced it. Now, with Ryan directly involved in the election, this plan will become a prominent issue. Already distorted, the Left will continue to have at it. To his credit, Ryan is a communicator, so if anyone can effectively walk the common folk through some of the plan details, it’s him.

He’s also likely to be labeled extreme or a hard-Right tea-bagger with draconian outlooks. This is a heavy distortion as Ryan’s “yes” votes on the bank bailouts and on Medicare expansion program prove. But it fits in well with the Left’s tired rhetoric — ‘Republicans want dirty water, polluted air and will abandon the old and poor’.

Many will ask if Ryan on the ticket will put Wisconsin in play? Except it already is. Sure, Obama won Wisconsin by 14% in 2008. That’s huge. But today, that has been trimmed down to about 6%. And don’t forget the message Wisconsin sent during the Walker recall. The better question is — can Ryan deliver Wisconsin? That is unknown but what is known is that Obama and the Democrats, still black and blue from the beating they took during the recall, will now be compelled to spend time and money in Wisconsin, perhaps to the detriment of a different swing state.

Because Ryan is a communicator he should hold his own during the VP debate. Ryan is not a punch-line kind of guy so Biden may score a jab or two. But if properly prepped, Ryan should be able to counter. And if the debate actually delves into issues of substance, Ryan is likely to badly embarrass Biden and show him as the buffoon he is. Ryan’s expertise on budget matters should help bring Romney up to speed, too.

Romney’s selection of Ryan has, intentionally or unintentionally, changed the nature of election. Probably not as much as most pundits think. The economy will remain the primary issue but now political ideology has been introduced. Team Romney must be confident the common folk want to hear about fiscal responsibility and changes to entitlements — complete with fine details. Ryan offers this. Obama wins here also as he now has ideological distortions to exploit. Both sides, particularly the super PACs, will play to this — do you want the anti-America radical Left or the rich loving polluters on the Right — but the reality is voters that answer to strict ideology have already made their decision. Independents aren’t likely to be swayed by the well worn cliches. It is likely to boil down to who the voters feel can get us out of this mess.

People vote for president not VP. But if there is one politician in America currently capable of explaining America’s nasty financial situation, in painful detail, it is Ryan. The Left, by pushing ideology, will guarantee Ryan has to break out the charts. But that’s a Ryan strength.

Like every candidate, Ryan has some shortcomings. But his positives far out distance his negatives. And compared to Biden as a VP, he’s gold. Ryan is informed, intelligent, and a proven leader. He isn’t an elite live audience orator but there are few better with television interviews and presentations. Romney definitely could have made a worse choice. He may not have been able to make a better one.

Follow I.M. Citizen at IMCitizen.net

Bookmark and Share

What Does Paul Ryan Bring to the Ticket?

 Bookmark and Share  By picking Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan as his running mate, Democrats will claim that Mitt Romney, a wealthy and heartless robber baron who has killed people through his business dealings, has picked a running mate who pushed grandma off a cliff and is trying to make the wealthy richer by starving the poor.  Democrats will claim that the Romney’s selection of Paul Ryan aligns the G.O.P. with it’s most damaging and ideologically extreme policies.

Less than two hours after nominating Romney for Vice President, the Obama-Biden campaign went up with a new website that can be found when one goggles Paul Ryan or ask the questions who is Paul Ryan?  Typing that question on your keyboard will bring up barackobama.com/paul-ryan,  an Obama  website that defines the Romney-Ryan ticket as the “go back team”  and claims that Paul Ryan is the architect of a plan to end Medicare as we know it and which raises taxes on the middle-class in an attempt to create tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires.

An hour after Romney named Ryan as his Vice President, Obama campaign manager Jim Messina issued a statement claiming that Congressman Ryan “is best known as the author of a budget so radical The New York Times called it ‘the most extreme budget plan passed by a House of Congress in modern times’.”

So it is clear that Democrats are ready to do exactly what they were expected to do ——- escalate their political terrorism and double down on their class warfare tactics.   But they do so at the risk of falling right into the trap which Republicans have baited with with a tempting target that has hidden in it the issues that lie at the heart of the 2012 election —– the budget and the economy, the two issues which Democrats must avoid if they want to be elected.

By endorsing Paul Ryan as his running mate and embracing the Ryan approach to fiscal sanity, Romney has dared Democrats to continue their fear mongering.  And if Democrats continue to take the bait, they will be ensuring that the very issues they are trying to make voters fear the Romney-Ryan ticket for, are the very issues brought to the forefront of the campaign.  The selection of Ryan as his running mate is both courageous and brilliant.  It demonstrates that Romney is committed to fiscal responsibility and unafraid of defending conservative economic policies against the harsh distortion and demonization of demoncrats.  But by selecting Paul Ryan as his running mate, Romney has also plotted a brilliant strategy that now puts him in control of the political agenda by reframing the campaigning on the big issues which lie at the heart of our nation’s future.

While Obama and his fellow demoncrats try to describe the fiscal responsibility of a Romney-Ryan ticket in divisive class warfare terms, they will be forcing the Romney-Ryan ticket to explain their ideas and shed the truth on those ideas.  By going on the attack, demoncrats will be forced to actually have to debate the economy and the budget, something which they would rather not address.   The liberal strategy of distractions and distortions will give Republicans the opportunity yo fully explain the big fiscal decisions that will have to be made but which demoncrats refuse to address.

The demonization of the Romney-Ryan economic policies will provide Republicans the perfect chance to explain why it is not Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney who are endangering Medicare, but that it is the status quo of the the left and their nominee President Obama, which is endangering Medicare.   The attempts to demonize Romney and Ryan and scare senior citizens into believing that Romney and Ryan are throwing them under the bus, the ensuing national debate will force the truth out and shed the light of day on the facts that Ryan’s entitlement reforms not only reduce the national debt by $6 trillion dollars without raising taxes on anybody, but that it makes Medicare solvent and preserves it for generations to come, without making a single change to the program for those born prior to 1954.

Beyond Romney’s selection of Ryan taking control of the political agenda, it reinforces the impression of a leadership team that has the courage to propose bold plans and actual solutions that demonstrate an ability to get our nation back on track, something which the Obama-Biden team has been unable to do.  It also corners the market on the critically important independent swing vote which is made up largely of fiscal conservatives who want ideas turned into actions and actions turned into solutions more than they wish to hear politicians turn distortions into accusations.

In addition to placing someone on the Republican ticket who can appeal to independent voters, having Ryan as Romney’s running mate makes the usually blue state of Wisconsin fertile territory for Republicans.  History demonstrates that running mates can increase a tickets plurality of votes in their home state’s by as much as four percent.  Before nominating Ryan, the RealClearPolitics average of the most recent polls in Wisconsin has President Obama leading Romney by 5.4%.   Now with Ryan on the ticket there is good reason for Republicans to target that state in the months ahead, and as such, Wisconsin is likely to be deducted from the current projections of President Obama’s electoral college count.  And while Ryan’s popularity in neighboring Midwest states combined with his appeal to blue collar workers and personal background has still to be measured,  at this point in time he  can’t be seen as a drag on the Republican ticket in that region.

But picking Paul Ryan was much more than an attempt to select a regional nominee or a candidate who could help deliver a particular case.    It was a decision to pick a national nominee that would reframe the campaign and focus it on the big issues, the tough but unaddressed issues which Democrats are trying to avoid but will now be forced to confront because of Paul Ryan’s solutions and Mitt Romney’s courage to fight for those solutions.  Picking Paul Ryan will force voters to have to choose between two clearly different paths for our nation.  One path is a series of  tax and spend policies of an Administration which has refused to address our problems or even admit that the problems exist, and which has turned our economic woes into such a systemically debilitating problem that it is now the biggest threat to our national security.  The other path seeks to be hoinest with the American people and stop pretending that federal treasury is an ATM machine that issues a staedy and endlesss stream of free cash.  This other path is one which acknowledges our problems and addresses them by making tough decisions, to implement bold solutions and reforms that will help to prevent the United Sates from following in the footsteps of Greece.

What does Paul Ryan bring to the Republican ticket?

He brings us the opportunity to confront the demons that are haunting our economic health and the chance to slay them before they consume us.  He brings the promise of an issue oriented debate that reclaims the narrative of this election in a way that will allow it to focus on the problems that we face instead of the the distortions that left tries to create.   He also brings to the ticket the bait that will entice Democrats to take their class warfare strategy and lies to an extent so profoundly outrageous and exaggerated that they will lose what little credibility they have remaining.

Bookmark and Share

The VP Matrix

Excitement continues to brew about who Mitt Romney might choose as his Vice President.  Today a story hit the news circulation that Marco Rubio is not being vetted, but Tim Pawlenty is being given serious consideration.  Romney found himself on the defensive this evening.  But before you get too excited about a Marco Rubio candidacy, or too upset about it, you may want to take a breather and consider who Romney is and what kind of campaign he is running.  Flash and splash are not the orders of the day.

Mitt Romney’s campaign need do no more than promise a stronger economy and let Obama continue to create a weaker economy.  In fact, Mitt Romney’s tour through small town USA promoting the private sector and values of competition is exactly where he needs to be.  Obama is spouting a controversy mixed with a gaffe every day.  Why jump in front of a train wreck?  Romney’s VP choice will be about as blockbuster as a sandwich from a WaWa vending machine.

Get out your VP scorecards and consider the following:

Mitt’s VP choice will not be a fresh face.

Mitt Romney is not looking for a candidate with little national experience.  Nor is he looking for a candidate who everyone on the far right loves.  Romney doesn’t need a shot of adrenaline or steroids.  The last thing he needs is someone who is going to distract from the national disaster of the Obama Presidency.  Romney does not need a divisive TEA party figure.  He certainly doesn’t need someone who could be perceived as inexperienced.  If Romney picks a veteran, the media will be cautious about trying to embarrass them as a rookie.  But media types smell blood in the water when there is fresh meat.  Even a studied, prepared candidate might not be able to field a trick question like “do you support the Bush doctrine”.  However, a veteran is less likely to be asked that question.

Obama’s inexperience took a back seat in the media when McCain brought in Palin

This is bad for Allen West, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Susana Martinez, Scott Walker, and Paul Ryan.  Could be good for Mitch Daniels, Tim Pawlenty, Jeb Bush, Condi Rice, or Rudy Guiliani.

Mitt’s VP choice will not be old and tired.

The death knell for a Republican candidacy, fair or not, is being old and grey.  Nothing plays into stereotypes of Republicans more than an old, grey haired, slow talking wrinkly man.  While Romney doesn’t need a shot in the arm, he also doesn’t need something contributing to the stereotypes more than he does already.  Right now Romney is Reaganesque in his looks and style.  But an older veteran running mate would turn his campaign into the old rich white people’s ticket.  Again, it may not be fair or right, but don’t expect a VP over 55 years old.

Don’t expect Newt Gingrich, Fred Thompson, or Rob Portman.  Could be good for Bobby McDonnell, Nikki Haley, Chris Christie

Jack Kemp and Bob Dole combined had nearly two centuries of experience

Mitt’s VP choice may not be female or minority.

There is this idea that the only way to defeat Barack Obama is by running a female or minority VP candidate.  Aside from that strategy failing miserably with Sarah Palin, the problem is that Republicans pay far less attention to race and gender than Democrats do, and Democrats virulently hate conservative women and minorities.  We have seen in recent years just how much visible hatred has been directed toward Sarah Palin, Christine O’Donnell, Allen West, Nikki Haley, Michelle Bachmann, Bobby Jindal, Marco Rubio, etc.  There is a clear desire on the left for female and minority Republicans to fail.  In Mitt Romney’s case, he is not looking for diversity for diversity’s sake.  That’s not to say he won’t pick a female or minority candidate, but if he does it will be someone respected by both sides and unassailable.

This makes Allen West, Bobby Jindal, Marco Rubio, Nikki Haley, and Susana Martinez less likely.  However, it doesn’t necessarily knock Condoleeza Rice out of the running, although she will carry the stigma on the left of being chosen for diversity’s sake.  Again, might not be fair, but since when were politics fair.

Mitt’s VP choice will not be controversial.

It’s bad when your VP candidate has almost as many quotable gaffes as Joe Biden

Mitt Romney is not looking to cause trouble for himself.  He doesn’t need a loudmouth or a controversial character.  Don’t expect any candidate who is going to make serious waves.  As I said before, Romney doesn’t need a distraction from the freak show of the Obama economy.  Expect a well respected candidate who is as smooth politically as Romney himself.

You can scratch the Donald, Chris Christie, Paul Ryan, Allen West, and Newt Gingrich off your list.  This is a strike against Jeb Bush and Condoleeza Rice as well.  But it favors Mitch Daniels, possibly Bob McDonell, and John Thune.

Expect a strategic pick.

Romney’s not going to choose a popular governor from a red state.  But he might choose a popular candidate from a purple or blue state.  And there are a few to choose from.  Rubio would lock of Florida.  Bob McDonnell could secure the nearly must win blue state of Virginia.  Tim Pawlenty could inspire votes from the teetering Great Lakes states.  Rick Snyder of Michigan could really bring in some blue states, but he is likely disqualified for being old and a fresh face at the same time.  Brian Sandoval might help swing Nevada to Romney while also providing the opportunity to highlight Harry Reid’s role in the destruction of our economy.

This set of criteria will hardly provide a definite pick.  In fact, some points are contradictory.  But it should provide some ideas for people who are looking at the potential VP picks.  I could hardly make a prediction even based on this criteria.  But I do believe it comprises the factors that Romney will be looking at when making his pick.

Hit Piece Misses

The day after Scott Walker demonstrated the sheer might of the conservative vote over the power of public unions, media outlets are doing everything they can to find something else to talk about.  For example, Ross Tucker at The Exchange writes “Republicans Bungle the Battle Over Light Bulbs”.  His article is all about how Republicans are preventing Americans from saving money by preventing Democrats from making incandescent light bulbs illegal.  Apparently, the only way Americans know how to buy economically is if the government eliminates all non-economical options as determined by bureaucrats in DC.

In other news, MSNBC tried to say that the Walker win was a great thing for Obama because the exit polls that showed Walker barely surviving also showed Obama winning in Wisconsin.  Of course, Walker didn’t barely survive, but instead creamed his opponent by a 7 point margin.  If you adjust exit polling by the actual results of the election, Romney will have the distinction of being the first Republican President to win Wisconsin since Ronald Reagan.

AP highlighted Elizabeth Warren tweeting about Scott Brown’s no vote the Democrat equal pay bill that would unintentionally make more women unemployable.  I’m not sure why Warren needs an equal pay bill for women; she already got her affirmative action benefits for being a “Cherokee”.

But the best hit piece was a headline from Rick Newman at US News & World Report stating that Mitt Romney’s desire to sell the government owned GM stock would cost taxpayers $15 billion.  Or as his headline put it, “Mitt Romney’s Stance on GM Sale Would Cost Taxpayers Dearly”.  What a headline.

Newman himself reviews the reason we have GM stock in the first place, but can’t seem to make the connection that the losses to taxpayers from GM might actually be Obama’s fault.  When GM was faltering and heading into bankruptcy, instead of selling GM to Italy like he did with Chrysler or allowing them to go through the legal bankruptcy protection process, Obama funneled about $25 billion dollars into GM making the US taxpayer a Wall Street shareholder.  He did the same thing with AIG and Citigroup.

When it comes to playing Wall Street fund manager with our tax dollars, Obama sucks. I wonder what Occupy Wall Street thinks about our Wall Street fund manager-in-chief?

When GM re-emerged on the market at $35 a share, Obama did not cut our losses and sell.  Instead he held on to GM with our tax dollars.  GM has now dropped to $21 a share according to Newman’s article.  Newman admits that GM would have to reach $52 a share in order for taxpayers to recover the original money Obama invested in GM.

The premise of Newman’s article is that we don’t need any of our money back and can wait to see if GM makes it back to $52 a share.  Of course, at this point GM would have to more than double in value.  Newman thinks this could happen by the end of 2013.  I’d like to know what he is smoking and where I can get some.

Large cap stocks rarely double in a year.  Large cap stocks freshly out of bankruptcy with 60% of their common stock shares owned by a government who is just itching to sell may never double in price. Romney is wise to cut our losses.

By Newman’s own math, Obama cost taxpayers $8.7 billion by not selling when GM peaked at $39.

Newman was trying to use fuzzy math to make Romney the bad guy for cleaning up the President’s taxpayer funded investment.  Instead, he unintentionally presents a clear indictment of one more foolish Wall Street fund manager: Barack Obama.

The Hidden Truth Behind Wisconsin’s Vote

Yesterday Wisconsin voters confirmed the validity of Gov. Scott Walker’s agenda and slapped unions hard enough to leave a welt. Ultimately, the recall election, spurred by union interests and hyped as “too close to call” for months, wasn’t that close at all. Walker jumped out to an early lead and prevailed easily over the generic and boring Democrat Tom Barrett. But there is more to this story.

Since taking power, Walker has knocked down unemployment a full point and has created some 28,000 jobs. Juan Williams on Fox, promoted the asinine idea that Walker should be recalled because he didn’t deliver 250,000 jobs. But if Walker could have spent the last 18 months doing his job rather than defending it, those employment numbers would be higher. This sad complaint also shows where the left really stands regarding jobs. After all, if Williams and the left are down on 28,000 jobs created then they must be really down on the pathetic results of Obama, who has netted zero. That’s zero, as in the number lower than one. But they aren’t because they don’t care about jobs. They care only about the expansion of government. They dream of an American society where public unions take money from government workers and funnel it to Democratic leaders. These leaders, in turn, pass laws to help perpetuate this cycle. Meanwhile, to pacify folks not involved with unions, they provide endless entitlement programs. But entitlement programs mean nothing if only a tiny portion of the population is collecting them. Therefore, Democrats do nothing about the economy. In fact, wrapped in lies about protecting people and the environment, they in fact, attack industries and businesses with straggling legislation to ensure the economy sputters. It’s simple really — more unemployed people means more entitlements and more entitlements means more people reliant on government. Those reliant on government handouts will vote for those writing the checks.

But the citizenry of Wisconsin rejected this. They see the illusion. They want to be working and independent not unemployed and reliant.

Scott Walker also wiped away $3.6 billion in deficits, ultimately creating a surplus, without raising taxes. Pay special attention to the word ‘without’ in the previous sentence. As progressives and Democrats continue to call for tax hikes rather than common sense cuts they’re only going to dig their grave deeper.

Over the next few weeks, the airwaves will be saturated with reasoning as to what the Wisconsin results mean. Unfortunately, with a presidential election still to come, virtually everyone that hits the airwaves will put a spin on this in hopes of concealing the real meaning. The right, still composed of too many political cowards, will resort to generic talking points like ‘a good solid win’ and ‘Walker’s accomplishments shows raising taxes isn’t necessary’ and ‘Wisconsin voters have had enough of big government’. Although these points are accurate, they are still a surface-based perspective concealing the reality.

And the left, utterly horrified, can’t afford to mention the true meaning of this vote. They will promote ideas all over the board like it was ‘merely a state election and therefore won’t have national implications’, or that Wisconsin shows why the ‘hardcore, radical right needs to be tamed’ or even ‘this is the beginning of the end of democracy’. Well, this is the beginning of the end of something, that’s for sure. Of what?

Oh, just the progressive-liberal movement.

Outrageous conclusion? Not really.

The fact is that all the supposed reasons and justifications for this recall are utter rubbish. The only issue Democrats and unions were really fighting is payroll deducted union dues. Nothing more. Unions, contrary to the hype, retained the ability to negotiate pay. Further, knowing the gig was up, they folded on benefit contributions early on. But when Walker took away mandatory dues, unions and Democratic politician’s hair stood up. By making union dues a choice for members rather than a payroll deducted requirement, Walker has changed the money river that funds the Democratic party into a stream. And this is the real reason behind Walker’s recall.

On the last day of May, Fox reported, “Wisconsin membership in the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees-the state’s second-largest public-sector union after the National Education Association, which represents teachers-fell to 28,745 in February from 62,818 in March 2011, according to a person who has viewed Afscme’s figures. A spokesman for Afscme declined to comment.”

Cearly, given a choice, union members prefer not to pay dues. Whether members quit or were tossed out after they stopped paying dues is irrelevant. That discussion is a distraction. The point is for the first time in forty years, the money laundering scheme put in place by the Democratic party has been destroyed. Citizens paying government workers, who in turn pay unions, who in turn pay Democratic politicians is a scam that the Wisconsin citizens will no longer tolerate. Democrats and unions fought it hard but lost. But they lost more than just the Wisconsin fight. Forcing a recall vote after a legitimate election that put Walker in power, was, like Obama-care, another example of the Democratic party going against the will of the people. Democrats and unions looked selfish and low doing so. As the election year pushes forward, this shameful behavior will be remembered.

Wisconsin is a major step in dis-mantling of the progressive liberal movement. Obviously, Republican governors across the land will feel emboldened and initiate similar agendas. And stopping unions ability to steal from the citizens will be the goal. ”For many years, [unions] were the unquestioned biggest boy on the block, you didn’t dare cross them,” said Bill Wilson, president of the conservative group Americans for Limited Government. But “if they are unable to topple a governor in a state like Wisconsin, then their power is greatly reduced and greatly overstated. … If they can’t maintain it there, then I would have to contend that only in the most liberal of states — California, Illinois — are they going to be able to maintain it.”

Progressive liberals have always been in the minority and without money, their ability to promote and perpetuate their anti-American philosophy is damaged considerably. Look for infighting as pragmatic Democrats, for survival of the party, begin distancing themselves from liberals by bad-mouthing liberal philosophy and rejecting liberal spin. There are meaningful political struggles ahead, but if the cards fall correctly and the hands are played smartly we could see liberalism within the Democratic party marginalized for several administrations.

Follow I.M. Citizen at IMCitizen.net

Wisconsin Bodes Well For Republicans in November and America in General While Making Liberals Suicidal

  Bookmark and Share Last night’s trouncing of liberal Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett by Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker in a rare recall election, marked a pronounced shift in American attitudes towards liberalism, big labor unions, and the agenda of the radical leftists who wish to hijack democracy and government in order to suppress the true will of the people.

The stunning victory by Walker over big labor union and bosses and the liberal Occupy forces, left Republicans and conservatives pleasantly surprised and it left Democrats and their liberal soul mates mired in anger and a depression so deep that at times at times, some of them seemed to show suicidal tendencies.

As seen in the video below, one Barney Rubble sounding Tom Barrett, big labor union, liberal activist broke down during a brief interview with a CNN reporter.  In the thirty second interview, the emotional Barrett backer held back tears and choked up several times as his quivering voice declared that Walker’s victory was “the end of the U.S.” and that “democracy was dead”.

What the ignorant, emotional wreck representing the liberal point of view did not realize was that Scott Walker’s landslide victory was not the end of democracy, it was merely the beginning of the end to the recent resurgence of American Socialist-Democrats in contemporary American politics.

Walker’s win was not an end of democracy, it was a vindication of the democratic process.  Voters of Wisconsin said three things last night.  They declared that when they elect someone to do a job, their vote should stick and that person should be afforded the opportunity to do that job until their term is up, not when liberals don’t get their way.  They also said that Scott Walker’s policies of fiscal austerity, getting control of the budget, and his attempts to rein in the out of control big labor union bosses, is the right way to go.  But their overwhelming support for Walker also said something else.  It said that a political leaders who are willing to take on the tough problems and who are willing to stand up to the most belligerent bullies and politically intimidating forces in our country, deserve our respect, our support, and a chance to deliver upon their promises.

Whether this bodes well for Republicans or not has yet to be seen, but it should.  However that really depends on whether Republicans get the right message from Walker’s win or not.

If Republicans like Mitt Romney fail to gleam from the election results the fact that Americans want reforms and that they want their politicians to actually enact reforms and not just talk about them, then they will be facing a tough electoral road ahead.  They will be risking the support of millions of Americans who are no longer tolerant of politics-as-usual and who are not particularly attracted to the go-along-to-get-along types.  If Republicans are not willing to accept the fact that a majority of Americans want more Scott Walkers and Chris Christies leading than Tom Barretts and Jerry Browns leading them, then they will go the way of names like Dick Lugar and Mike Castle, Republicans whose years of service were  ultimately rejected because they were viewed as part of the establishment and part of the problem and not as one of the people and a part of the solution.

Meanwhile the left is almost apoplectic.

Liberal opinion mavens like Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz were distraught and stretching for the slightest hint of a silver lining in last night’s liberal loss.  They devoted entire segments to trying to convince everyone that Republicans undermined this recall election with an abundance of money.  They tried to suggest that voters did not really vote on the issues that mattered to them.  They simply voted for Walker because he spent more money.  But these suggestions ignored reality and such things as the fact that more than 80% of Wisconsin’s voters made up their minds about who they were going to vote for, over a month ago, well before most of the money was spent in this campaign.

Another aspect of the money angle that many liberal advisors and talking heads tried to ascribe credit or blame for Walker’s win to was the significantly larger amount of out of state campaign contributions that Walker received than Barrett received.   What was lost on the Rachel Maddows of the liberal loonasphere was the fact that the level of money contributed to the candidates in last night’s recall election was a reflection of the level of approval that each candidate’s cause had both in Wisconsin and in the nation.  They also failed to accept that it was a sign of things to come in November.

But that was a fact not lost on all liberals, such as the one featured in the video accompanying this post.

Like the goofy leftist in that clip, may liberals are beside themselves and not just because they lost, but because they lost by so much.  And not just in their attempt to defeat Scott Walker.  Last night liberals lost in almost every attempt to recall all those who opposed their socialist, big labor union agenda, including their attempt to remove Wisconsin’s Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch as well as in at least three of the four Republican State Senators that were target for removal by the left.   The fourth one, Van Wangaard of the 24th Senate District, is too close to definitively declare to have been defeated yet.

The resounding losses are frightening liberals so much that many are beginning to suffer from what in 2004,  psychologist and executive director of the American Health Association, Rob Gordon called “post-election selection trauma” or PEST.  According to author David Limbaugh in his book Bankrupt: The Intellectual and Moral Bankruptcy of Today’s Democratic Party”, Gordon described symptoms of the disorder as having “feelings of withdrawal and isolationism, anger and bitterness, loss of appetite, sleeplessness, nightmares, intense moodiness, and preoccupied anxiety over the country’s future”.    In 2004, PEST was running rampant in the liberal loonasphere.  According to Limbaugh, Renana Brooks, a Washington, D.C. clinical psychologist observed that people were suffering from post-traumatic stress and total despair when George W. Bush was reelected.  Brooks added that PEST sufferers were believing that “America was pretty much destroyed”.

It was even reported that after the election, a liberal 25 year old Gerogia boy by the name of Andrew Veal, committed suicide with a shotgun blast to his head because of John Kerry’s loss in the 2004 election.

Upon witnessing the tears and emotional breakdowns of the left last night, I would say that post-election selection trauma is going to become a national epidemic among liberals.  In fact I think liberals will be dropping like flies because not only will they be stressing over the post election results in Wisconsin, their anxiety will only be compounded by the pre-election jitters that they will have to try survive in advance of their now anticipated losses in the House of Representatives, U.S. Senate, gubernatorial elections, and the White House come November.Bookmark and Share

Trunkline 2012: Wednesday’s News From The Presidential Race – 05/16/12

Bookmark and Share  Today’s Trunkline 2012, has a roundup of news from the campaign trail that tells tales of Romney’s possible Mormon problem, Biden’s attacks on Mitt, Mitt being a vampire, Crossroads dumping a big load on Barry, Romney warning regulators, ands much more.

Bookmark and Share

Is Mitt Bouyant? Or Santorum Sinking?

The day before Super Tuesday, Mitt Romney is looking good.  It’s looking like he will take the key state of Ohio and could take Tennessee.  Both of these are very close races.  But Romney’s ascendency back to the top is marked by Santorum’s dive in the polls, and Newt’s resurgence again.  Newt will win Georgia, which has the most delegates of any Super Tuesday state.  Newt is also now tied with Santorum and within one point of Romney in Tennessee according to one poll.  Just last week, Santorum was looking good in both Ohio and Tennessee.

If Santorum is suddenly seen as faltering, we may see the polls seesaw back to Newt on fears of unelectability.  However, at this late stage that may serve to only help Romney, unless Santorum loses big time.  If Santorum comes in third in Tennessee or Ohio and Gingrich easily wins Georgia, the shift back to Newt could be significant.

Consider this, if Santorum was not in the race and his voters went to Newt, Newt would sweep Ohio, Tennessee, and Georgia.  On the other hand, the same could be said for Santorum if Newt dropped out and his votes went to Santorum.  In either case, Romney is the beneficiary of the social conservative split.  Meanwhile, Ron Paul is fleeing from social issues as he descends back into below 10% irrelevancy.

This could be short lived however, as Republicans revisit the myth that social issues are losers in elections.  As I pointed out the other day, a one dimensional economy candidate is going to struggle against Obama.  Republicans are more likely to be inspired to go to the polls for a bold conservative, and Romney is all pastels.  If Santorum falters tomorrow and Newt remains on message, this one could be far from over.

Congressman Paul Ryan Announces that He is Not Running for President

Bookmark and Share   Despite my high hopes for the presidential candidacy of Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan, today he announced that he hasn’t changed his mind about staying out of the race.

Early in the day on Monday, Ryan released the following statement on his website:

“I sincerely appreciate the support from those eager to chart a brighter future for the next generation. While humbled by the encouragement, I have not changed my mind, and therefore I am not seeking our party’s nomination for President. I remain hopeful that our party will nominate a candidate committed to a pro-growth agenda of reform that restores the promise and prosperity of our exceptional nation. I remain grateful to those I serve in Southern Wisconsin for the unique opportunity to advance this effort in Congress.”

For me the certainty of Congressman Ryan’s not being a potential President in 2012 is disappointing. I am also disappointed by the lack of focus within the Republican presidential field that his absence will allow for there to be on the fiscal issues of the day and the economic problems we must confront. His absence from the race leaves me still uncommitted to anyone . I hope that will change, but for that to happen, a candidate, declared or declared, will have to show me that they are opposed to the Washington D.C. political establishment and politics-as-usual. They will have to show  me that they truly understand that we spend too much and need to start spending less and reducing the size and scope of government. They must also demonstrate to me that have the vision to lead our nation on a reform minded agenda that is willing to make real changes to many things including our existing code.  They also must be willing to insure that above all else, America remains a loyal defender of liberty that is willing to strengthen it at home and defend from threats abroad.

In many ways I will I judge the candidates by the standard set by Paul Ryan and President Ronald Reagan as well as my political mentor Jack Kemp.  . A standard that requires a temperament that is forceful but not combative, is passionate about their commitment to the cause of conservatism, especially fiscal conservatism, and has the wherewithal to conduct themselves in a way that makes me proud of them, my Party, and our nation. And while none of these standards are impossible to meet, the trick is trying to meet all of them or as many as possible, while also demonstrating to me that they have capacity to campaign and articulate the conservative cause in a way that attracts enough voters to end the reign of the Obama Administration.

Bookmark and Share

Meet Paul Ryan: See for yourself why Paul Ryan is “The Answer” for Republicans

Bookmark and Share    With the possibility of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan entering the Republican race for President, White House 2012 presents to you the Congressman’s White House 2012 Fact Page. which is located here.  Here you wil be able to research the Congressman and read about him and his background.  You will also find here, his contact information, staff contacts,  websites, voting records, speeches, position papers, campaign finance reports, and much more.

While White House 2012 as website has not endorsed any candidate for President,  I have, and the person who I am hoping will run and can endorse is Paul Ryan.  To be cear, this is not an endorsement by White house 2012.  ON WH12, our writers are entitled to their own opinions.  This happens to be mine.

Check Paul Ryan out.  If you agree, contact his office and urge him to run, then send his WH12 2012 page on to your friends and family and ask them to do the same. 

Scroll down to the bottom of the page for links to Paul’s websites, financial filings, positions papers, speeches , YouTube Channel and contact information

Congressman Paul Ryan

Born: January 29, 1970 (age 41), Janesville, Wisconsin

Spouse(s): Janna Ryan

Children : Sam, Liza & Charlie

Residence : Janesville, Wisconsin

Alma mater: Miami University, (Ohio) (BA),

Profession: Blue Collar worker, Marketing Consultant

Religion: Catholic

Political Career :

  • Intern for the foreign affairs advisor assigned to Wisconsin Sen. Bob Kasten.
  • staff economist attached to the office of U.S. Senator Bob Kasten
  • 1992 – Ryan became a speechwriter and a volunteer economic analyst with Empower America, an advocacy group formed by Jack Kemp, former education secretary Bill Bennett, the late diplomat Jeane Kirkpatrick and former Minnesota Rep. Vin Weber.
  • 1998 – Elected to Congress from his Wisconsin hometown

Photobucket

Paul Ryan On The Issues

Photobucket

Foreign Policy Gun Control Budget & Economy Education
Homeland Security Crime Government Reform Health Care
War & Peace Drugs Tax Reform Abortion
Free Trade Civil Rights Social Security Families & Children
Immigration Jobs Welfare & Poverty Corporations
Energy & Oil Environment Technology Principles & Values

Photobucket

Click here for Paul Ryan’s Facebook Page

Facebook site allowed any

Paul Ryan

Photobucket

Paul Ryan is in many ways a unique politician. He was born with no silver spoon in his mouth. He did not receive an overpriced education behind the cloistered walls of Harvard or Yale and he did not buy his way into elected office.

The youngest of four children, Paul became accustomed to his parent’s tradition of an incentive system for allowances that saw his weekly allowance cut from $4 to $2 if he received a B on his reports cards, and received no allowance if he got a C or less. At 16, he discovered his father dead of a heart attack, and had to inform his mother and older siblings. His sister is nine years older and two brothers eight and five years his senior. According to Paul, “It threw me for a loop for a couple of years.”……“I did a lot of soul-searching. A lot of self-discovery. I started forming my beliefs.”

At 18, Paul attended Miami University in Oxford, Ohio, where he eventually earned a B.A. in economics and political science . It was here that Paul’s political ideology developed through his reading of free market authors including Milton Friedman, F. A. Hayek, and Ayn Rand. At a D.C. gathering honoring the author of “Atlas Shrugged” and “The Fountainhead.” Paul recalled, “The reason I got involved in public service, by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be Ayn Rand,”

During his college years he supported himself by working for the Oscar Mayer meat and cold cut production company as a Wienermobile driver. During his junior year, he went on to study at the Washington Semester program at American University. Here he worked as a college intern opening mail for the foreign affairs advisor assigned to Wisconsin Sen. Bob Kasten. In his early years as a D.C. staffer, Paul moon lighted on Capitol Hill as a waiter at the Tortilla Coast restaurant and as a fitness trainer at Washington Sport and Health Club, among various other side jobs.

Eventually he gained a congressional position as a staff economist attached to the office of U.S. Senator Bob Kasten. But after Kasten was defeated by Democrat Russ Feingold in 1992, Paul Ryan became a speechwriter and a volunteer economic analyst with Empower America, an advocacy group formed by Jack Kemp, former education secretary Bill Bennett, the late diplomat Jeane Kirkpatrick and former Minnesota Rep. Vin Weber.

In 1996, Paul Ryan became a speechwriter for Vice-Presidential candidate Jack Kemp during the 1996 United States presidential election and later worked as legislative director for U.S. Senator Sam Brownback.

After the ’96 presidential election, Paul Ryan returned home and worked as a marketing consultant for his family’s construction , Ryan Incorporated Central, a company began as an earth moving business created by his great-grandfather in 1884. Now his cousins’ excavating company and called Ryan Inc. Central, it happens to be a union shop. According to Ryan “I grew up in organized labor,”……“I have a lot of constituents who are in organized labor. I really do not have this ‘us against them’ mentality”. Ryan worked there in high school and then briefly worked there again but as a marketing consultant while running for office.

In 1998, upon the retirement of his Congressman he ran for and won the Republican nomination for the job and eventually won the seat against Democratic opponent Lydia Spottswood.

Upon being elected, one of Ryan’s priorities was to convert a truck into a rolling district office that allowed him to keep regular congressional office hours with his constituents at various and far-flung locations across the Wisconsin First U.S. House District

He went on to become one of the three founding members of the House GOP Young Guns Program but what Ryan became most known for was his devotion to fiscal conservatism It is said that till this day, Ryan speaks with a certain degree of awe and respect for people like Jack Kemp, who strongly influenced his supply side economic beliefs and in the footsteps of Jack Kemp, became one of fiscal conservatism most passionate leaders.

While no one is perfect, Ryan will have to defend his 2008 vote for TARP, but does offer a plausible defense. But on May 21, 2008, Ryan introduced H.R. 6110, the “Roadmap for America’s Future Act of 2008”. This proposed legislation was a realistic attempt to face some of the most significant burdens on and causes for our perilous national debt. Ryan’s plan courageously dealt with entitlement issues. Its stated aims were to ensure universal access to health insurance; strengthen Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security; lift the debt from future generations; and promote economic growth and job creation in America. But Democrats in control of Congress did not move on it.

On April 1, 2009, Ryan introduced his alternative to the 2010 United States federal budget. This proposed alternative would have eliminated the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, lowered the top tax rate to 25%, introduced an 8.5% value-added consumption tax, and imposed a five-year spending freeze on all discretionary spending. It would also have replaced the Medicare system. Instead, it proposed that starting in 2021, the federal government would pay part of the cost of private medical insurance for individuals turning 65. Ryan’s proposed budget would also have allowed taxpayers to opt out of the federal income taxation system with itemized deductions, and instead pay a flat 10 percent of adjusted gross income up to $100,000 and 25 percent on any remaining income. It was ultimately rejected in the house by a vote of 293-137, with 38 Republicans in opposition.

When Republicans regained control of the House in 2010, Ryan’s budgetary expertise earned him the chairmanship of the House budget committee. One of the most powerful positions in the land. Not an easy fete for a man of just 41 years of age.

In late January 2010, Ryan released a new version of his “Roadmap.” It would give across the board tax cuts by reducing income tax rates; eliminating income taxes on capital gains, dividends, and interest; and abolishing the corporate income tax, the estate tax, and the alternative minimum tax. The plan would privatize a portion of Social Security, eliminate the tax exclusion for employer-sponsored health insurance, and privatize MediCare.

Of course these ideas have been distorted by the liberal left and used to scare senior citizens with. This was not unexpected, yet Ryan still had the courage to face the reality we are in, and touch the political third rails that so many do not have the courage to deal with.

Photobucket

As of the writing of this page Paul Ryan is said to still be considering a run for President in 2012. He has the backing of many heavy hitters too. From my perspective I hope he does.

Paul Ryan may not seem to be an obvious winner of either the G.O.P. nomination or the presidency. He is indeed not an immediate frontrunner and it is quite clear that the left will try to bury Congressman Ryan with tactics of fear and distortions regarding his willingness to tackle the entitlements and bring the type of economic reforms that our nation can not deny it needs if we are to ever get on the right track again.

But at the same time, many voters, including the ever important independent voter, are willing to listen to viable solutions and they are appreciative of those who are willing to speak truthfully about the situation we are in and the steps we must consider to improve it. This combined with the Congressman’s solemn committment to the cause, and his incomparable ability to articulate the economic problems we face and steps we must take, can make him a force to reckon with if given a chance.

I call Paul Ryan the little engine that could. Not only is he passionate but rational, and honest but pragmatic, he is sincere. Furthermore, while many may not initially see him as being a name big enough to win the Republican presidential nomination or to defeat President Obama, I believe people will be surprised. Ryan has a temperament that voters will appreciate and that is perfect for the current national climate. He is forceful but not combative and convincing but not cocky. And beyond that, he has the capacity to articulate a youthful vision for our nation that is realistic but optimistic. He has the ability to be a Republican JFK without the nepotism, philandering, and drama of Camelot.

Paul Ryan is a new generation Republican. He is the next generation of American leadership that for many, Barack Obama was suppose to be but proved not to be. And unlike President Obama Paul Ryan has both life experiences as a blue-collar worker and a legislative leader who has actually worked and produced concrete results, not just campaigned and produced rhetoric.

Ryan is a perfect anti-Obama. He is a limited government, states rights, Constitution based, deficit hawk with a record, the ability to defend that record, and who can articulate the cause, connect with the people, and has a genuine sense of committment that can be seen through the passion he has for his beliefs.

Stars01.gif picture by kempite

Stars01.gif picture by kempite

Current Contact Info

Washington, D.C. Address
1233 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-3031
Fax: 202-225-3393
District Address
5455 Sheridan Road
Suite 125
Kenosha, WI 53140
Phone: 262-654-1901
Fax: 262-654-2156
District Address
216 6th Street
Racine, WI 53403
Phone: 262-637-0510
Fax: 262-637-5689
District Address
20 South Main Street
Suite 10
Janesville, WI 53545
Phone: 608-752-4050
Toll Free: 888-909-7926
Fax: 608-752-4711
Key Staff Address
Joyce Meyer
Chief of Staff
1113 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-4901
Phone: 202-225-3031
Fax: 202-225-3393
Key Staff Address
Sarah Ulrich
Scheduler
1113 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-4901
Phone: 202-225-3031
Fax: 202-225-3393
Key Staff Address
Kate Matus
Press Secretary
1113 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-4901
Phone: 202-225-3031
Fax: 202-225-3393
Campaign Address
Post Office Box 2194
Janesville, WI 53545



Bookmark and Share

Paul Ryan for President

Bookmark and Share    “If Ryan does decide to run, win or lose, I will be behind him either until he wins the nomination and the presidency or ends his campaign.”  -Anthony Del Pellegrino, aka: Kempite

`
Reports have indicated that Wisconsin Congressman and Chairman of the House Budget Committee Paul. Ryan is in the final stages of deciding on a presidential run. According to The Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes, Ryan associates have been quietly going around and laying the groundwork for a run which has included establishing the deadlines for gaining ballot access to the ballot in each of the 50 states. Hayes reports that Ryan has been discussing the possibilities of running with advisors and close firlends about a run since last spring. He further adds that Congressman Ryan had been expecting Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels to run and he was looking forward to a Daniels candidacy. But after a call from Governor Daniels to Ryan to give him a heads about his decision not to run, Ryan’s thinking about a run for President changed profoundly.

Hayes also reports that a Republican source close to Ryan, claims the Congressman is;

“coming around,” and adds “With Paul, it’s more about obligation than opportunity,” says another Wisconsin Republican. “He is determined to have the 2012 election be about the big things. If that means he has to run, he’s open to it.”

For its part Roll Call reports that the Congressman discussed the matter with House Speaker John Boehner when the subject of a spot on the Joint Committee on Deficit Reduction arose.

But Roll Call also reports that while Paul Ryan is considering a run for president he is unlikely not to run for the same reasons that held him back so far……….to avoid the fundraising and political demands that would keep him away from his family for extended periods. Another consideration for Paul Ryan would also be the possibility of losing the election and losing his influential position of the House Budget Committee where he is doing good and critically important work.

Much of the speculation about Ryan’s possible presidential candidacy arose from a talk show interview the Congressman conducted by Charlie Sykes, a Milwaukee based radio show host. That exchange went as follows:

Sykes :  “Looking at the Republican field right now, are you confident that the candidates there are able to articulate the issues of the debt and the deficit and the need to reform entitlements in the way that you want to see done?”

Ryan :  (laughing) “Why did you ask me that?”

Sykes“You know exactly why I asked you that question.”

Ryan :  “I know. We’ll see. I didn’t see it last night. I haven’t seen it to date. We’ll see. People’s campaigns evolve – they get better. So we’ll see.”

Ryan :  “Look, the way I see 2012 – we owe it to the country to let them choose the path they want our country to take. And I just have yet to see a strong and principled articulation of the kind of limited government, opportunity society path that we would provide as an alternative to the Obama cradle to grave welfare state.”

Sykes :  “Do you think that it is absolutely essential that there be a Republican candidate who is able to articulate…”

Ryan : (cutting Sykes off) “I do. Because this is how we get our country back. We do it through a referendum letting the country pick the path not by having a committee of 12 people pick the path or not by having just the inertia of just letting the status quo just stumble through by winning a campaign based on dividing people.”

Sykes :  You understands why people think that person should be you?.”

Ryan :  “Well, I keep hearing that. I’m hoping that people will step up and I’m hoping that somebody – I can help them fashion this. You know my story and you know my answer – and I haven’t changed it. We’ve got a long way to go. There’s 15 months left.”

The interview which was conducted last Tuesday, came before the official entry of Texas Governor Rick Perry, who as of today, according to a Rasmussen survey finds Perry the frontrunner in the race ahead of Mitt Romney by 11% and Michele Bachmann by 17%.

Whether or not Congressman Ryan believes that Rick Perry is the candidate who can offer the “strong and principled articulation of the kind of limited government, opportunity society path” that we need,  has yet to be seen, but either way, the Congressman can’t really wait much longer to decide. The very latest he can get into the game would be October. Anything beyond that will be placing any chance for the successful financing and organizing of a campaign a a great disadvantage that will be hard to overcome.

Much like Paul Ryan, my thinking about the Republican presidential race also changed “profoundly” when Governor Mitch Daniels decided not to seek the nomination. For me, Mitch Daniels was one of the best qualified people to address our predominant economic problems and was a candidate with whom a good campaign to defeat the President could have been built around. With Daniels out, and others like Sarah Palin not in, while I have found many things I liked about such people as Mitt Romney, I have not yet  been confident enough to throw my support behind any of them. But that will not be the case if Paul Ryan runs. If Ryan runs, White House 2012 will have itself a Ryan 2012 correspondent in me.

Paul Ryan represents the true future of the G.O.P. and as a fiscally responsible leader he is just what America needs. He is a new generation Republican, one who works from the premise of what is best for the nation, not for his poll numbers. That kind of thinking may not win a him the nomination through the type of popularity contest that is today’s politics, but it is the type of honesty that American voters should welcome and demand.

At some point one must stand behind what they believe in not just what they think will win. And beyond any shadow of any doubt, I believe in Paul Ryan , therefore if Ryan does decide to run, win or lose, I will be behind him either until he wins the nomination and the presidency or ends his campaign.

Bookmark and Share

Prosser Win Confirms Conservative Sentiments

Democrats in Wisconsin may want to think twice about continuing to pursue recall votes against Republican Senators who just saved their state by making some tough choices. In fact, Wisconsin is showing that despite major blowback, the country is ready for a party to step to the plate and make those tough choices.

Justice David Prosser

It seemed like Prosser would have an easy election after taking more than 50% of the vote in a non-partisan primary against pro-union, liberal Kloppenburg. But after unions within and outside of the state poured millions of dollars into Kloppenburg’s campaign, it seemed like the state-wide election for Wisconsin Supreme Court would be closer. In fact, union cabbies offered free rides for union voters to the polls. Wisconsin liberals were organized for America and the Prosser/Kloppenburg election became a referendum on Scott Walker.

In fact, a Kloppenburg victory would have swayed the state Supreme Court to a 4-3 Liberal court. Walker’s union busting, budget saving legislation would be a footnote in Wisconsin history.

Walker had made the tough conservative choices. The city was nearly shut down as union members were bused in from other states to crowd and trash the capitol. Democrat Senators fled the state to shut down the legislative process and kindergarten teachers were sending death threats to Republican Senators while staying home with fraudulent sick notes from liberal doctors. On the blogs and comment sections across the web, Democrats were thanking Scott Walker for 2012 on a silver platter, and I even saw one comment talking about how they would get their revenge on the “scabbers”. It felt like a choreographed fight scene from Newsies.

The lead in the Prosser/Kloppenburg election kept changing and kept everyone on the edge of their seats throughout the night, and with a lead of about 200 votes Democrats claimed victory the next day. A recount was possible, but it seemed as though the left was right. Going after public unions to cut a $3 billion state deficit would be the end of the Conservative tidal wave that swept the country in 2010. It was a dark night.

But the next day, we discovered that the AP vote total did not include all the votes. Prosser had actually won by a very comfortable 7,500 votes. If you want to know how significant the Prosser win is, just Google his name. You will find as many stories as you did about Iraq a couple months after the surge strategy started. When stories about successful Republican politicians or policies disappear from the mainstream media, you know they are significant.

This was a statewide election where the same Wisconsin voters who elected Scott Walker came out again and elected Justice David Prosser. Anyone who thinks 2010 was a fluke and that an Obama re-election is a forgone conclusion should look at the national union mob that was re-defeated in Wisconsin.

Americans are ready to cut spending and deal with the deficit.

Is Paul Ryan’s Path to Prosperity Also a Path to the Vice Presidency?

Bookmark and Share Few budget proposals that come out of Congress, ever offer significant change. Most federal budget proposals to come out of the Congress and the White House, tinker with things around the edges, but rarely do they ever strike at the heart of fiscal problems. In fact, budget proposals that come out of legislative bureaucrats, usually only exacerbate the fiscal problems and kick the can down the road for another Congress or the next generation to handle. But on April 5th, 2011, Wisconsin Republican Representative Paul Ryan, Chairman of the House Budget Committee, introduced to the American people a budget proposal that not only meets the needs of today, but helps to make sure that the needs of tomorrow are met.

In November of 2010 voters gave House Republicans a mandate to shrink government, create sustainable, private sector jobs and to cut spending. Now in one of the first real opportunities for the new Republican majority to show the American people that they got this message, took it to heart, and are serious about acting out in terms of the federal budget, Congressman Paul Ryan has stepped up to the plate for the G.O.P., and hit a homerun.

The budget that he has convinced fellow Republicans to support, cuts $6.2 trillion over 10 years, imposes a cap on discretionary spending, reduces the tax rate for individuals and businesses to 25% and gives states the flexibility to manage Medicaid rather than keeping it in the hands of bureaucrats in Washington.

Below this post you will find a video introduction to Rep. Ryan’s Path to Prosperity, a Republican attempt to control spending and put us ona path to prosperity and a balanced budget. The details can be found here.

In both the video and the details of the budget, what we see is a man who is passionate about the budgets ability to put America back on track and to save future generations from a crushing debt that will eventually consume every cent of each tax dollar they send to Washington. And in the video you see a man who is not angry, not using inflammatory political rhetoric or trying to demonize political opponents. He uses soft spoken words to explain hard hitting facts that tell the truth about sensitive issues such as Medicaid and other entitlement programs. From the perspective of a American taxpayer, what Paul Ryan says is legitimate and honest, but from a political perspective this video shows a man who possesses a mix of economic understanding, passionate beliefs and the ability to articulate and address the problems facing this nation and the solutions needed to address those problems.

That is why no matter who the Republican presidential nominee is and no matter whether he likes it or not, Paul Ryan will be on a short list of names to be considered for Vice President on the 2012 presidential ticket. Ryan has already sworn that he is not running for President in 2012 and says he honestly does not see that in his future, but it would be futile for him at this time to state any objections to the number two spot for Republicans in 2012. If the call comes, the pressure is put on, and the political climate continues to echo the need for economic leadership, the times will dictate that Paul Ryan accept such an offer. For no man who truly loves their country can refuse to serve it when they are convinced that duty calls. And right now America calls out for the type of leadership and fiscal understanding that Paul Ryan brings to the table and possibly to the presidential ticket.

Bookmark and Share

AP Gets Early Start on Nov 2nd, 2012 Headlines

A Perfect GOP Candidate Is Hard To Find. Yes, that is the unbiased AP headline of a story published today by AP writer Phillip Elliot. Elliot then presents us with an expose on exactly why every potential Republican candidate in the 2012 primary season is unworthy of Republican votes.

John Huntsman worked as an ambassador for Obama. Mitt Romney implemented Romneycare in Massachusetts. Newt Gingrich had two affairs and two failed marriages. Sarah Palin has had “countless impolitical moments”.

An infamous premature headline

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For every potential candidate, Elliot has a reason why they should lose.

Santorum is no good, he lost a Senate election in 2006. I wonder if Elliot knows that Abraham Lincoln lost the 1858 Senate race to Stephen Douglas, before defeating that same Stephen Douglas two years later in the Presidential race.

Tim Pawlenty apparently is too much into green energy. And of course, Haley Barbour is a racist, southern hick.

Of course, no freshman Republican is even considered in this article. After all, anyone can tell you that two years as a Senator does not give someone enough experience to run for President. Not if you are a Republican, that is.

I don’t remember the article about finding the perfect Democrat candidate in 2012. If Barbour has to defend his statements on segregation, should Obama defend his anti-white statements in his books? What about Obama’s church affiliation? How about his many “impolitical moments”?

Beyond mere gaffs and embarrassing associations, Obama brought us the failed stimulus plan that increased our debt over a trillion dollars with nothing to show for it. He gave us the unconstitutional Obamacare law and is currently in contempt of court for his executive order banning oil drilling in parts of the gulf. Obama’s attorney general has refused to follow through with voter intimidation prosecutions, refused to uphold more than one federal law on the books, and has betrayed his own racist leanings. Obama has now plunged us into a conflict with Libya where no one seems to know what the goals or end game is and where the only objective seems to be to blow stuff up but ensure that we are not responsible for winning.

But it’s not just Republicans who have reasons to not re-elect Obama. After promising to walk the picket lines wherever union rights are being denied, Obama was absent in the union showdown of our generation in Wisconsin. Obama has reversed his promise to close Guantanamo Bay, and continues to push back the date to bring our troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan. In fact, Obama’s legacy in Afghanistan is a surge strategy headed up by General David Petreaus. While Republicans are frustrated by the incompetent handling of the attacks on Libya, Democrats (if they are consistent) should be upset that we are getting involved at all. Obama is turning out to be more of a war hawk than his predecessor. He went back on his campaign promise to avoid an insurance mandate, skipped single payer, and extended the Bush tax cuts.

Where is the AP story about how hard it is to find a perfect Democrat candidate for 2012? The story of the 2012 election is not written yet. That is up to the voters. Do we want four more years of President Barack Obama?

Paul Ryan’s Republican Response to the State of the Union Proves To Be a Hit

Bookmark and Share On this night, while our President rightfully took center stage as he addressed the condition of our nation and plotted his plans for its future, another man demonstrated himself to be a sincere, respectful and effective spokesman for the loyal opposition that disagrees not with the forward direction for our nation to go in, but thepath to take in take in that direction.

In his response to the Presidents State of the Union, Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan had a significantly smaller amount of time than President Obama to make the case for Republicans. While the President took nearly 45 minutes to make his, and had a significantly larger audience paying attention to him, Congressman Ryan had a ten minute window of opportunity to achieve the goal of keeping peoples mind open to the Republicans approach to governance during the course of this next year. And he did it. (see his response below)

Ryans speech was a personable and compelling presentation not of the differences that Republicans have with Democrats but of the differences between Republicans and Democrats. Right off the bat, he brought to the life how the newly led Republican House began address to the issue of fiscal responsibility by cutting its own budget and adopting new spending restraints.

As Ryan continued, while he laid blame for the budget deficit that he described as the greatest problem we face today, at the feet of both political parties, he convincingly argued for the type of fiscal responsibility that he, as the Chairman of the House Budget Committee will fight for and needs our support in.

He contrasted the intended economic path that he and his Republican colleagues wish to plot for us with that of the record levels of spending that President Obama and the previously Democrat controlled Congress took us on.

Ryan held the President and Democrats accountable for trying to pass off reckless spending as effective economic investment. He held the opposition Partys feet to the fire on a healthcare reform mandates that businesses and unions allover the nation are seeking waivers from in an attempt to avoid crushing bureaucratic expenses that will break their backs.

Congressman Ryans speech was one which brought to light many of the reasons for the current state of nation and impressed upon all Americans that the issue that is currently to our greatest detriment is looming debt. He reminded us that while nations like The U.K., Ireland and Greece have already succumbed to the fallout of massive spending and spending, the United States has not yet fallen into the disarray that they have but is about to.

But through all the facts and through all the generalities which he used to paint a picture of how Republicans intend to lead us while working with the President, it was Ryans presentation that helped carry his message over the finish line. Paul Ryan was articulate, passionate, confident and with a look that was straight in our eyes, he offered the G.O.P. a response that was convincing and to be proud of.

One of the most memorable lines of the night, of either speech given,while offering a contrast between the different roles that Republicans andDemocrats see for government in our lives, Ryan politely but powerfully stated;

“Limited government also means effective government. When government takes on too many tasks, it usually doesnt do any of them very well. Its no coincidence that trust in government is at an all-time low now that the size of government is at an all-time high.”

That line was typical of those that that Ryan responsibly articualted as he reinforced the guiding principles behind Republican policy intentions. Another memorable quote presented itself when Ryan reminded us that it is no coincidence that Americans trust in government is now at its lowest as government is at its largest.

In the end, the Republican response to the Presidents State of the Union will not get the mileage that President Obamas speech will for him and the agenda he put forth for our nation, but it has helped keep many American minds open to the Republicans legislative approach to improving our economy, especially under Ryans leadership as Chairman of the House Budget Committee.

Paul Ryan has made it clear that he does intend to run for President and it is safe to say that he wont be on the top of the ticket in 2012. However, after tonight, Paul Ryan is very likely going to be on the short list of vice presidential options for the man or woman his at the top of the ticket.

Despite the charade of some Democrats sitting in the Presidents audience with some Republicans, the undeniable political and ideological divide that exists in Congress as well as with in the hearts and minds of American voters, will not allow for democrats to praise Paul Ryans response. Indeed Republican partisans may at most only provide President Obama with polite passing words. But within the existing partisan divide, Congressman Paul Ryan was able to deliver a partisan message in a way that allowed many to see him as very viable bridge in that political divide.

Bookmark and Share

Rep. Paul Ryan’s Star Rises Just in Time for the 2012 Presidential Race

Bookmark and Share After President Obama delivers his annual State of the Union address, Republicans will respond in a speech that they have chosen Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan to deliver. Ryan was chosen due in large part to the emphasis that the GOP wants to place on the national economy and issues such as the growing federal budget, spending and the national debt, all issues which few elected officials are as qualified to address as Paul Ryan is.

In addition to being a fiscally responsible deficit hawk, Ryan is the new chairman of the House Budget Committee, a position that makes him one of the most powerful men in government today. For Republicans, choosing Paul Ryan to respond to the President’s address is a wise one. Ryan is passionate about economic issues, especially when it concerns, smaller government, less spending and paying off our debt. He is also a man who does more than just offer talking points and criticism. He is a man of action and idea. In 2010 he put forward his own economic roadmap for America, a plan which he stands behind and which the G.O.P. would also be wise to unite behind.

Giving Ryan the national spotlight by having him issue the response to the President, confirms that Ryan is not only qualified to address the fiscal issues that the G.O.P. wants to focus on, but that Ryan is also a figure that people can trust and whom can articulate the cause convincingly and effectively. These are qualities that one looks for in a President and Ryan’s possession of these qualities is one of the reason why he is included in White House 2012’s list of contenders.

It is why he has nearly 13,500 fans than one of Ryan’s fans created for Facebook on a Ryan For President Facebook page. In fact after Rep. Ryan went face to face with President Obama and sparred with him over Obamacare in 2010, many blogs and articles such as this one in Red State, touted the future presidency of Paul Ryan.

But the Congressman quickly tried to put such talk to rest. The Weekly Standard once reported that at a fundraiser in In July of 2010, when asked if there’s any chance he would run for president, he replied “No, no there isn’t,” and added “I want to be a normal person,”. He then went to say, “Other people can run for that thing.”and then, while pointing to one of his young children, said; “Other people can’t do this”.

In February of 2010, told a Wisconsin television program host, “I’ll give you as Shermanesque a quote as I can,” said Ryan. “I am not going to run for president. I’m just not going to do it. My head’s not that big, and my kids are too small.” He added I am young and am not going to be a career politician. The complete interview can be viewed here. Later that same week in a Real Clear Politics interview reasserted that position but he did state that he would not rule out a 2012 run for the United States Senate against Democrat incumbent Herb Kohl.

Such a run would probably be more realistic than a run for President by the 40 year old Congressman at the moment, but people still hold out hope for seeing him in the Oval Office and if not in the Oval Office, than at least on the ticket as Vice President. In fact, one website suggests such a thing with Chris Christie running at the top of the ticket and Ryan holding the number two slot.

But while hope and speculation about a Ryan run for the White House make their rounds, it is worth noting that a 2012 run for the senate or on the GOP presidential ticket, would cost him his critically influential role in Congress as the House Budget Committee chairman, a position that few are more up to than Ryan. As for who Paul Ryan does look towards when considering the presidency, the budget conscience Congressman points to Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels and says; “He would be a great president,” He told the Weekly Standard “He looks like your accountant, but that’s not so bad maybe.” That assessment is founded on Ryan’s focus on the budget and his faith in his own economic roadmap, a major consideration which led him to say; “Are there [other] people who right now know these issues, have the principles, have the courage of their convictions, and are willing and able to defend them? Nobody comes to my mind,” But he added that “any one of these guys” interested in running for president could get up to speed on the Road Map.

Presidential politics aside, for now, after announcing Ryan as the man who will give the GOP response to President Obama’s State of the Union, Republicans should be pleased with the fact that our Party leadership is wise enough to acknowledge the fact that Congressman Ryan is the right man to take the lead on the budget and the economic issues facing us. And we should also be mindful that if Paul Ryan does indeed not participate in the 2012 presidential as a candidate himself, we should try to make sure that our ultimate nominee embraces Paul Ryan’s thinking and leadership on fiscal responsibility.

Bookmark and Share
%d bloggers like this: