Thursday, August 30, 2012

Paul Ryan knocks it out of the park

This man is a breath of fresh air: sincere, honest, and principled. He wants to fix the mess we're in, and he knows how and why. I'll let him speak for himself—here's my selection of his best lines tonight:

Maybe the greatest waste of all was time. Here we were, faced with a massive job crisis - so deep that if everyone out of work stood in single file, that unemployment line would stretch the length of the entire American continent. You would think that any president, whatever his party, would make job creation, and nothing else, his first order of economic business. But this president didn't do that. Instead, we got a long, divisive, all-or-nothing attempt to put the federal government in charge of health care. 
Obamacare comes to more than two thousand pages of rules, mandates, taxes, fees, and fines that have no place in a free country. 
After four years of government trying to divide up the wealth, we will get America creating wealth again. With tax fairness and regulatory reform, we'll put government back on the side of the men and women who create jobs, and the men and women who need jobs. 
The choice is whether to put hard limits on economic growth, or hard limits on the size of government, and we choose to limit government. 
College graduates should not have to live out their 20s in their childhood bedrooms, staring up at fading Obama posters and wondering when they can move out and get going with life. 
If a man like Paul Ryan can't fix what ails this country, then all hope is lost. Ryan knows where we have to go, and Mitt Romney has a proven record of doing what needs to be done to get there. Together they are, in my opinion, the best hope we have for a better future.


randy said...

Ryan and Christie both had fantastic speeches. His medical insurance voucher plan needs to be explained more thoroughly though to be offered as a serious alternative to ObamaCare.

brodero said...

It all comes down to 3 states...Ohio,
Virginia and Florida....whoever wins
2 out of the 3...wins....

Vaulty McNut said...

Gloeschi said...

It is so refreshing to see some people getting sucked into the mirage of political choice.
The same speech, with the exception of Obamacare, would have been a perfect fit 4 years ago. In another 4 years' time, it won't be any different.

Lawyer in NJ said...

FACT CHECK: Ryan takes factual shortcuts in speech

McKibbinUSA said...

Paul Ryan supports online education and other disruptive technologies of the future -- I will have to choose between the Democrats and Republicans at some point (I can't stand either party) -- however, Paul Ryan is the current leader for my vote...

PS: I just wish that both Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan would renounce military-industrial Republicanism and adopt instead the Libertarian platform in full...

Seth said...

Ryan's Leninist Libertarianism:

All Power to the (Soviets) Corporate Boards!

Lenin said he wanted workers' councils, or Soviets, to hold all political power. Obviously, they all just wound up acting as robotic slaves of the topmost 'workers council': the politburo. Ryan's vision of America ultimately means we wind up with a politburo of semi-hereditary Fortune 50 CEO's. Nobody else has a voice in any political decisions because they can't afford it. Equality of Opportunity is just a name for something they don't actually believe in, but preserves the illusion that 'equality' has any part in the American future: aristocracy.

Rich said...

Your politics is getting in the way of your ability to analyze.

1. Do you think that either party, post-crisis and during the greatest surge in automation and business process improvements EVER, would have a meaningful effect on the employment rate?

2. Try reading your health insurance policy! Republicans have placed insurance companies at the heart of Medicare D and prevented a single-payor solution with the Affordable Care Act. Neither party dealt with the cancer of med-malpractice lawsuits, because BOTH parties are filled with lawyers. Professional courtesy goes a long way with that crew.

3. How does Mitt Romney's (and my) 13-15% federal tax rate make the US government dividing the wealth, other than putting a BIG FAT THUMB on the scale of fairness? In 1976, with Nixon as President, the rate was 70%.

4. The federal government employment under Obama DROPPED.-see -

5. College grads unemployment has everything to do with reduced employment due to better efficiency. They are doing better than lesser educated workers, and less well than grad school graduates.

If a researcher can believe stories rather than facts because the story fits their preconceived notions better than the facts do, THEN all hope is lost.

Step up your game!

Cabodog said...

Scott, you mean having a President who has never managed so much as a Dairy Queen isn't working?


Benjamin Cole said...

Ryan promises to cut federal spending without touching the biggest federal agencies that make the bulk of federal outlays---but then says he wants to cut income taxes, from which those agencies are financed.

Entitlements are largely funded by payroll taxes.

If you want to cut entitlements, fine, then we may be able to cut payroll taxes.

If you want to cut agency outlays, great!---and then we can cut income taxes.

Ryan is, too sadly, mostly rhetoric, and not a serious student of the federal budget.

Unknown said...

William said...

"He assailed Mr. Obama for having “funneled” $716 billion out of Medicare, without mention that his own budget assumed cuts of precisely that magnitude.

"Emblematic of the liberties Mr. Ryan took was his depiction of the hometown auto plant whose shuttering he implicitly blamed on Mr. Obama — even though the plant closed before the president was inaugurated."

"But a party that claims to be willing to make hard choices ought to be prepared to spell some of them out. Mr. Ryan offered only the bare assertion that federal spending of 20 percent of the gross domestic product is “enough” — despite the aging of the population and Mr. Romney’s vow to keep defense spending alone at 4 percent.

"Mr. Ryan skewered the president in his speech for creating and then walking away from a bipartisan debt commission that, he said, “came back with an urgent report.” ... but omitted from Mr. Ryan’s self-serving rendition was the uncomfortable fact that Mr. Ryan served on that very commission but was unwilling to supported its “urgent” recommendations. Will the Romney-Ryan ticket endorse them now?

Scott Grannis said...

For all those who believe that Ryan "lied," I suggest you do some more research. The Janesville plant was put on standby in 2009, and Ryan never blamed Obama for the closure. Start here:

Scott Grannis said...

Or here:

William said...

From the Wall Street Journal:

"The Janesville, Wis., General Motors plant Paul Ryan mentioned in his speech Wednesday night closed on Dec. 23, 2008 – before President Barack Obama took office and before his auto task force engineered GM’s federally financed bankruptcy.

"In June 2008, with GM’s finances crumbling, then-Chief Executive Rick Wagoner announced Janesville and three other truck plants would close by 2010. Three months later, however, the financial crisis hit. Auto sales plunged and GM, nearly broke, moved up the closing of Janesville and halted production for good on Dec. 23.

Scott Grannis said...

Or here:

brodero said...

Bottom line...Ryan should have left it out of his speech. This election is down to the 6% who are undecided.
They have favorable opinion of Obama
and Romney. They are white,women,moderate in ideology,independent in party identification, and make less than 50,000 a year. Everybody else has made their minds up.

Rob said...

President-to-be Scott, what is your economic policy that will allow everyone to buy an "inexpensive" $2800 Mac ?

Scott Grannis said...

Rob, that's easy. I would adopt growth-oriented policies. Growth and prosperity are the best way to give as many people as possible the ability to buy great things like my new laptop. Rising prosperity means people's purchasing power increases, making everything effectively cheaper.

A partial listing of the policies needed to do this:

Eliminate as many tax deductions and loopholes as possible. Lower and flatten the income tax structure. Drastically reduce or eliminate the corporate income tax. Reduce federal spending as a % of GDP to 19-20%. Introduce market incentives to social security and health care (i.e., let people be the ones to decide how their health care dollars are spent and how their FICA contributions are invested). Reduce federal regulatory burdens.

Rob said...

OK. But when will the slaves in China who make it also be able to afford one ? Answer: when the world can find other slaves to replace them. What bothers me, Scott, is that your Mr. Sunshine blog speaks much sense but always stops short of any concern wider than A) yourself and B) your country / economy. So I ask you again, Mr. Blog President, will you give until it hurts to save your fellow man from slavery and misery ? Or will you just speak a few (cheap) words on the subject and go back to admiring your own creature comforts ?

Paul said...


"The federal government employment under Obama DROPPED.-see - "

You should know better than to trust anything from the creeps at Media Matters. Read your own link. Nowhere does it use the word "federal." All those government jobs lost were at the state and local level. Obama has added around 200,000 mostly useless federal workers.

"Step up your game."

Take your own advice.

Paul said...

"Bottom line...Ryan should have left it out of his speech."

Why? It was the truth.He can't control for Obama's palace guard in the media calling him a "liar" because they have no possible rebuttal.

"They have favorable opinion of Obama
and Romney."

They have a favorable opinion of Obama because the mainstream media ignores or downplays his monumental failures, malicious behavior, and general incompetence. It's time somebody told them the truth.

ClamPuddingPaddler said...

Scott, I love your analysis, but you have a political blind spot as big as a house. Paul Ryan voted for all the programs that have skyrocketed our deficit--the Bush wars and taxcuts. And those tax cuts really did the trick for job creation under Bush, one of the worst records of any president this century. It's obvious to anyone who doesn't get their "news" exclusively from Fox that the economic record of the Clinton years (or just about all Democratic preaidents) is better than when Republican policies are in power. I guess the doubling of the stock market under that "socialist" in the white house is just anticipating the return of the "job creators" :-)

Scott Grannis said...

The deficits are primarily the result of 1) a weak economy that has left many millions unemployed and not paying income taxes, 2) significant growth in entitlement programs, 3) significant growth in transfer payments, and 4) Obama's $800 billion stimulus bill. Spending under Obama has been significantly higher, as a percent of GDP, than under any post-war president. If employment were higher, income tax receipts would be a lot higher; it is not the tax cuts that have hurt revenues, but simply the loss of jobs, which in turn has a lot to do with ineffective and wasteful "stimulus," the growth of regulatory burdens, and four years of $1.3 trillion deficits, which have consumed all after tax corporate profits. Obama did not have to continue any Bush program (and I wish Bush had never spent as much as he did), but in addition to doing so (and starting his own war in Afghanistan), Obama has pushed hard for big increases in spending in every State of the Union address. His most recent budget proposal was so divorced from reality that it received not a single Democratic vote in Congress.

I think your blind spot is the issue, not mine.