Tucson Citizen.com
Fort Buckley - A virtual outpost, from which Don Smith discusses conservatism, politics, and national security matters

The Smart Democrats Are Worried About Paul Ryan–For Good Reasons*

by on Aug. 11, 2012, under Uncategorized

Any Democrats with a lick of common sense (there are a few) should be mighty worried about Paul Ryan’s selection as the Vice Presidential nominee on the GOP ticket. The Wall Street Journal’s John Fund explains one of the reasons why:

No doubt there are many Democrats rubbing their hands in glee in contemplation of reviving some version of the ad that featured an actor playing Paul Ryan pushing a grandmother in a wheelchair off a cliff. But the smarter ones are worried.

First, if Ryan is an extremist and his proposals are so unpopular, how has he won election seven times in a Democratic district? His lowest share of the vote was 57 percent — in his first race. He routinely wins over two-thirds of the vote. When Obama swept the nation in 2008, he carried Ryan’s district by four points. But at the same time, Ryan won reelection with 65 percent of the vote, meaning that a fifth of Obama voters also voted for him.

Ryan has pointed out to me that no Republican has carried his district for president since Ronald Reagan in 1984. “I have held hundreds of town-hall meetings in my district explaining why we have to take bold reform steps, and I’ve found treating people like adults works,” he told me. “All those ads pushing elderly woman off the cliffs don’t work anymore if you lay out the problem.”

Democrats and the media (yes, I repeat myself) have already started blasting the airwaves, claiming that Paul Ryan wants to steal the benefits of poor and sick Americans.

Unfortunately for those Democrats, Paul Ryan does a very good job of explaining why America’s entitlement system needs to change.

We don’t have the money to keep up the entitlement spending of the past 50 years. You can’t get the money you’d need by taxing people who make over $250,000 a year. There aren’t enough wealthier Americans to pay all the bills the Democrats want to run up.

The smarter Democrats know that. They know Paul Ryan knows that, and can explain himself. Very convincingly. (Ask the Democrats in his district who vote for him, time and time again.) THAT’s why the smart Democrats are scared.

That’s why the Democrats will try to demagogue him. That’s why the Democrats hope that their allies in the media will inhibit Ryan’s attempts to make his case to the American people.

Ultimately, though, it’s up to the American people to decide. What kind of future do they want? Paul Ryan is going to tell you some things that are tough to hear. We won’t have the money to do all the things we’ve done in the past. Anyone who’s been paying attention has known this day was coming. Well, it’s here.

The GOP is gambling that a majority of Americans will look at our economic situation soberly and thoughtfully. If they do, the GOP is confident that the Romney/Ryan ticket will win in November.

From Mary Katherine Ham of HotAir. If the Democrats want to debate ideas, and the course that America wants to chart for its future, Paul Ryan is ready for that debate.

With Ryan on the ticket, the debate should no longer be about contraception and the deferred cancer-causing capabilities of Bain investments. It will be about the budget and the $16-trillion debt, the unsustainable trajectory of the federal government and the promises it’s already breaking to generations to come. It will be about Simpson-Bowles and a federal government that hasn’t even bothered to pass a budget since before the iPad existed. It will be about how four years of grossly increased spending has stimulated us into the worst recovery in American history…It will be about how creating new entitlement programs cannot possibly fix the ones that are already broken. And, it will be about whether we value an ever more dependent society or an ever more successful one.

As Ryan said this morning, it will be about, “what kind of country we want to be” and “what kind of people we want to be.

Here are more reasons why the smart Democrats will fear Paul Ryan:

He has earned the respect of Democrats and liberals who oppose him.

William Saletan, in Slate magazine—a publication that’s not exactly known as a conservative magazine: (All emphasis is added).

Ryan refutes the Democratic Party’s bogus arguments. He knows that our domestic spending trajectory is unsustainable and that liberals who fail to get it under control are leading their constituents over a cliff, just like in Europe. Eventually, you can’t borrow enough money to make good on your promises, and everyone’s screwed. Ryan understands that the longer we ignore the debt crisis and postpone serious budget cuts—the liberal equivalent of denying global warming—the more painful the reckoning will be. There’s nothing compassionate about that kind of irresponsibility.

Maybe, like me, you were raised in a liberal household. You don’t agree with conservative ideas on social or foreign policy. But this is why God made Republicans: to force a reality check when Democrats overpromise and overspend.

Erskine Bowles, former Clinton Chief of Staff, disagreed with Ryan’s budget proposals—but he called them “sensible…honest, serious” (Hat tip to Ed Morrissey at HotAir)

Paul Ryan is an effective debater and advocate

Ryan is smart, well-spoken and tenacious in an exchange of ideas. He bedeviled the Democrats during the Obamacare debates. He is a great choice to lead the GOP’s resistance to out-of-control, foolish Democratic Party spending. The online pundit “Iowahawk” said it best this weekend: “Paul Ryan represents Obama’s most horrifying nightmare: Math.” Paul Ryan can, and will, do the math.

Ryan comes from a background that’s hard to demagogue.

Ryan grew up in Janesville, Wisconsin (population 63,575). His father was a lawyer who died when Paul was 16. Ryan didn’t go to an Ivy League university; he attended Miami of Ohio, the kind of college that a middle-class kid in the Midwest would attend.

Ryan used money from his deceased father’s Social Security benefits to help pay for college. Democrats will gleefully point to that and call Ryan a hypocrite. Ryan, however, is skillful enough to point out that he’s trying to reform federal entitlements so they can endure for future generations.

Does anyone, really, think that our entitlements don’t need massive reforms? This fellow knows they do:

And what I’ve tried to explain to them [Democrats] is, number one, if you look at the numbers, then Medicare in particular will run out of money and we will not be able to sustain that program no matter how much taxes go up. I mean, it’s not an option for us to just sit by and do nothing.

That “fellow” was Barack Obama.

My fellow Tucsonans, given what you’ve seen the Democrats do with power—and with your children’s and grandchildren’s money—over the past three years, do you really think they’re committed to meaningful entitlement reform? Or, will they kick the can down the road for our grandchildren to deal with?

THAT is why smart Democrats fear Paul Ryan.

* This article was originally posted over the weekend—I have modified and expanded it



  • toughteri

    Hurray!!! Ryan is the absolutely correct choice to run with Romney. I can’t wait for the single V.P. candidate debate with Biden; it should be a stunner.

    • fortbuckley

      toughteri, I wouldn’t expect too much out of that debate. The MSM moderator will know that it’s his/her duty to protect Biden. Expect a debate full of fluff questions and short on specifics.

      • toughteri

        Biden is known for mangling “fluff” too,

        • fortbuckley

          Yes he is. But the MSM moderator will block for him. The MSM favors Democrats and they know Biden is vulnerable. Expect the moderator to help Biden all he/she can.

  • Jonathan_Duhamel

    Apparently the democrats over at Hispanic Politico are not among the smarter ones.

    • BajaDemocrats

      Garcia-Blase says she a Republican turned Independent; I see no reason to doubt her. But this Democrat is delighted with the pick of Paul Ryan – it’s the boldest VP pick since Dan Quayle.

      And what my good colleague Don calls “stealing the benefits of the poor” we call turning the Medicare we’ve paid into all our lives into a voucher system that subsidizes the insurance industry, leave seniors to the mercy of insurance companies, and if they get really sick and hit the maximum they would have no option for medical care. Ryan calls his budget plan the “Path to Prosperity” – what he doesn’t tell you is who gets the prosperity, and who gets left out in the cold..

      • fortbuckley

        My good colleague David, as with many Democrats, ignores math: you can’t pay OUT benefits if you don’t have the money to pay FOR them.

        Democrats and Republicans alike have taken the money that we’ve “paid into all our lives” and spent it on other things. It’s gone. Now, we can either keep spending our grandchildren’s money on ourselves, or learn to live within our means.

        Lastly, as for the quality of the Democrats’ VP picks—well, let’s look at the last two THEY picked. John Edwards and Joe Biden.

        • BajaDemocrats

          If you Republicans want to go around telling seniors and those approaching retirement “Yes, we know we promised it and you paid into it all your lives, but so sorry, we’ve changed our minds” please go right ahead. We Democrats will stick with “Promises Made, Promises Kept”.

          And if we’re “out of money” why does the Ryan Budget Plan continue deficit spending for almost another 30 years??? While his plan guts Medicare, Medicaid and many other benefit programs, it’s not projected to balance the budget until 2040 because of all the tax cuts to the wealthy are greater than the spending cuts.

          Lastly, as for the quality of Republican VP picks–well, two words: Sarah Palin.

          • fortbuckley

            Democrats don’t have nearly enough money to pay for all the promises you’ve made over the years, and you know it. (Look at all the California cities going bankrupt because of the promises politicians made.) What should scare you is—Paul Ryan knows it and is going to tell everyone.

            Paul Ryan has been very clear: if you are 55 or older, you will get the same entitlement plans. No, Ryan’s plan doesn’t balance the budget for years. (Many Republicans want to cut more). Sadly, spending above our means is ingrained in American government. It’s going to take some time to stop.

            Democrats want to demagogue our entitlement crisis, so they can get four more years in power, so they can keep giving our grandchildren’s money, through deficit spending, to their cronies. (Cough cough Solyndra cough).

            As for Sarah Palin—I’ll bet Al Qaeda would be a lot more scared of her than they are of Joe Biden. Don’t believe me—read what Osama Bin Laden said about the man you Democrats chose to put one step away from the presidency:

            “Osama bin Laden didn’t think too much of Joe Biden, apparently”

            “In newly declassified documents found last year at his compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, and released Thursday, the late leader of Al Qaeda urges his followers to draw up plans to assassinate top US leaders, including President Obama and Gen. David Petraeus. But he left Vice President Biden off his notional hit list.”

            “Obama
            is the head of infidelity and killing him automatically will make Biden
            take over the presidency for the remainder of the term, as is the norm
            over there,” reads a letter that West Point’s Combating Terrorism Center believes was written by bin Laden. “Biden is totally unprepared for that post, which will lead the US into a crisis.”

            http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/Decoder-Wire/2012/0503/Bin-Laden-documents-diss-Joe-Biden.-Did-he-get-The-Onion-in-Abbottabad-video

            • BajaDemocrats

              Well, if you want to place any value on Osama bin Laden’s opinion or judgement, you go right ahead. I’ll take a big pass.

              • fortbuckley

                Of course you’ll take a big pass—you’re a Democrat. That’s why no one should trust modern-day Democrats with serious national security responsibilities. The last serious Democrat on national security, Joe Lieberman, got run out of the modern-day Democratic party.

                It is obvious that the world’s most capable terrorists see Democrats as easy marks. That will encourage them to strike us. Just as Bin Laden watched Bill Clinton’s milquestoast responses to Somalia and the African embassy bombings, and decided it was worth it to launch 9/11.

                • toughteri

                  Don’t forget to mention how Clinton & Co., in the Oval Office, listened in on the phone while Rwandans were being slaughtered, and ignored their cries for help.

  • Seth Miller

    Sure, we need to reform social security and medicare, but the Ryan plan would be absolutely disastrous. If you want to double down on every single policy+ that drove this country into almost (thanks to Obama for saving us) irreparable economic doom and spread those policies to the health care system for our grandparents then I guess Romney/Ryan is right for you. Otherwise, everything else posted here was basically laughably delusional.

    • fortbuckley

      “Maybe, like me, you were raised in a liberal household. You don’t agree
      with conservative ideas on social or foreign policy. But this is why God
      made Republicans: to force a reality check when Democrats overpromise
      and overspend.”

      William Saletan, “Why I Love Paul Ryan,” in Slate Magazine.

    • Ado Egbdf

      Better back off on that liberal Kool-Aid, Seth. Too much acid will give you the mistaken notion that your fellow working taxpayers somehow have an obligation to to provide you with taxpayer funded health care, and other welfare amenities.

  • BajaDemocrats

    “But the smarter ones are worried”

    - The Wall Street Journal attempting to define what makes some Democrats the “smarter ones” is like Fox News attempting to define what “fair and balanced” journalism is.

    • fortbuckley

      See William Saletan’s comment above. Saletan writes for Slate Magazine—not a conservative publication, by any stretch of the imagination.

      Oh heck—I’ll repeat his money quote here: “this is why God
      made Republicans: to force a reality check when Democrats overpromise and overspend.”

  • Ado Egbdf

    Not only are those Tequila Party drunks not the brightest bulbs in the chandelier, they are doing their level best to suppress dissent. After voicing an opinion which opposed their harassment of Sheriff Joe Arpaio on Sunday at his place of worship, I find I am no longer able to make comments in their blog. So much for these advocates of Mexican(mostly) illegals and their understanding of an exchange of ideas and/or our American notion of free speech. It seems quite apparent the only comments they want to hear over at their Hispanic Politico Tequila Party blog are ones posted in lockstep agreement with their agenda and ideology

    • toughteri

      That happened to me also; I’ve been banned from that blog for more than a week. Grow a pair Dee Dee.

      • Ado Egbdf

        Heh! Maybe she/he has already completed a transgender surgery program?

        • fortbuckley

          Ado, a warning. Language like that violates TC.com’s commenting guidelines. Besides, Hispanic Politico is beclowning itself. Pretty soon, they’ll report that Paul Ryan was the second gunman on the grassy knoll and caused the Fukushima tsunami with his Evil Paul Ryan Tsunami machine. Let’s just sit back and watch the silliness fly.

          • fortbuckley

            That didn’t take long. Hispanic Politico’s latest headline says that Paul Ryan “voted against Latino children.” I find that hard to believe. Paul has been working overtime on his Grinch costume, so he can steal Hooville’s Christmas tree in December. He hasn’t had TIME to vote against Latino children!

          • Ado Egbdf

            Hi Don, Just got back over here two days later. Sorry if I used language that violates. My post was of course a tongue in cheek reply to the “grow a pair” posting. I guess idiomatic figures of speech are preferable to more direct language. But then again, I’m a believer that simpler and direct comments are often better. Kindly google Occam’s razor for more on that line of logic . :+)

  • Plaza_de_Toros

    “Ryan has pointed out to me that no Republican has carried his district for president since Ronald Reagan in 1984.”

    Ryan’s district went for Bush in 2000 and 2004. I sincerely doubt Paul Ryan is ignorant of his own district’s voting history, so I’m assuming John Fund completely fabricated this meeting with Ryan, and didn’t bother to research his own fairy tales.

    • fortbuckley

      Um, you’re assuming that John Fund, a career reporter, “completely fabricated this meeting.” OK…

      • Plaza_de_Toros

        The quote from Fund’s article is (again) “Ryan has pointed out to me that no Republican has carried his district for president since Ronald Reagan in 1984.”

        In reality, George W. Bush carried that district in both 2000 and 2004. It is a cold, hard fact.

        In 2004, that district went 54% for Bush, and 46% for Kerry.
        In 2000, that district went 51% for Bush, and 45% for Gore.

        Source: http://www.opencongress.org/wiki/WI-01

        John Fund DIRECTLY attributed the false statement about WI-1 not being won by the GOP since 1984 to Paul Ryan. Now, that leaves three options:

        1. Rep. Ryan lied to John Fund, for absolutely no reason, and absolutely no gain.
        2. Rep. Ryan does not know the voting history of own district, which is utterly absurd.

        So, if Fund isn’t lying, then Ryan actually made that false claim, which means he is either a liar, or incredibly stupid. You can believe that, but I won’t. So that takes up to option three:

        3. Rep. Ryan never said that, but a little white lie helps John Fund’s premise of Rep. Ryan consistently winning a Democratic district.

        Here’s an additional tidbit: Cook’s Partisan Voting Index for WI-1 is R+2, meaning it regularly votes Republican 2 percentage point higher than the national average. Sure, that is within most margins of error, but a PVI of R+2 certainly means that WI-1, by any measure, is not a “Democrat district.”

        Source: http://cookpolitical.com/sites/default/files/pvistate.pdf

        So. Fund’s premise is “Democrats should be scared because Rep. Ryan has won multiple, consecutive terms in a Democratic district, that has not voted Republican since 1984.”

        The reality is, “Democrats should be scared because Rep. Ryan has won multiple, consecutive terms in a Republican leaning swing district, that voted for George W. Bush twice.”

        If you said that that to the few smart libs on the planet, they would laugh in your face, and rightly so.

        So, why is John Fund lying about this district being a Democratic stronghold? Why is he libeling Rep. Ryan as a liar and/or an idiot?

        By the way, I expect an actual response, with facts, this time.

        • fortbuckley

          First of all, I owe you nothing. You’ll get the response I feel like giving you. If I feel like giving you nothing, you’ll get nothing. If you don’t like it, who cares? Not me.

          If you wish to press the case that John Fund is a liar, go right ahead. If Fund got his facts wrong, take it up with him.

          For the sake of discussion—and only for the sake of discussion—let’s assume that Rep Ryan got it wrong about no GOP candidate but Reagan winning his district since Reagan in 1984.

          From that, you made a HUGE logic leap to assume that Fund “completely fabricated” his meeting with Ryan? Based on ONE sentence in Fund’s article, you’re assuming that a mainstream media reporter would not only make up, but report on, a meeting with a Vice Presidential candidate? Why would he do that? Wouldn’t he be at least one bit concerned that SOMEONE might expose him to be a liar?

          Here’s a more rational explanation—IF your data is correct: Ryan forgot that Bush had carried his district.

          I’m fine with conceding that to you—again, for the sake of discussion only—and sticking with the OTHER good stuff in Fund’s article. (1) Ryan won his district solidly in an Obama landslide (2) Ryan, the GOP’s most visible budget cutter still wins reelection handily, and (3) Ryan’s quotes about how voters appreciate being treated like adults and respond well if you lay out the political problems before them.

          • BajaDemocrats

            Ryan didn’t become “the GOP’s most visible budget cutter” until he became Chairman of the House Budget Committee in 2011, after the GOP won control of the House in the Nov. 2010 elections. So, he has never won reelection as “the GOP’s most visible budget cutter”. With Ryan on the ballot as both VP & Congressman this year, I think we have a good chance to defeat him.

          • Plaza_de_Toros

            So you’re going with “Rep. Ryan is an idiot.”

            A seven-term congressman who has had his staff present polling data to him in seven elections “forgot” the voting history of his own district. I think I’m going to borrow your sarcastic “OK…” from your initial reply.

  • Don

    I think that, when the American people realize that the choice for VP is between Paul Ryan and Joe Biden, Ryan will do quite well, indeed.

    Do they not teach geography in Delaware?