Mitt Romney's Selection Of Paul Ryan Is A Sign Of Desperation (Excellent Libertarian Analysis)

Many folks were surprised last night as rumors began leaking that Romney tapped Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, for the prestigious VP slot. The surprise came largely because many were expecting a more mundane pick like Tim Pawlenty or Rob Portman. The reactions from the GOP base is positive overall, although the story is still fresh and drawing conclusions is difficult. The reactions from the Democrat/Liberal base are predictable and I am guessing that the Obama campaign is licking its lips over the prospect of skewering Ryan like a kabob. I have a slightly different take, my feeling is that this pick is an indication that the Romney team is struggling and sees the prospect of winning in November diminishing with each passing day. People like Pawlenty and Portman is the equivalent of swinging for a base hit - the selection of Ryan is swinging for the fences. It is desperation and an attempt to shake things up substantially in the hopes of energizing a splintered and unimpressed Conservative base.

However I prefer to focus on the economics of politics, not the politics of politics - so lets take a look at what exactly makes Ryan such a risk.

Paul Ryan, to be sure, is an impressive politician. He has a perfect pedigree, is good looking and probably considered to be the premier fiscal wonk of the Republican party. His budget is considered by many to be the boldest and most courageous attempt at tackling America's most pressing issues, entitlements. Of course there is always more than the shiny facade pimped by party loyalists and for those that have bothered to investigate Ryan's record the picture becomes a bit murkier.

For starters there is the very pressing and disturbing votes of the Bush legacy. Specifically Ryan's support of: TARP, Medicare Part D and No Child Left Behind (NCLB). All three are wonderful examples of how the Republican party only fights for fiscal sanity when they are a minority party, the second they become the majority they expand Government programs at an alarming rate. NCLB is a monstrosity that gave the Department of Education teeth, Medicare Part D tacked on hundreds of billions (half a trillion as of today per year) to the debt and was passed in the House in a manner very reminiscent to ObamaCare and TARP is an egregious disregard of the free market system and should make any citizen sick to their stomach. While Ryan may be able to justify all these votes, there are Republicans in the House who did *not* vote for these programs and quite a handful.

Then of course there is the famous Ryan budget. A budget that reminds of me the great Oz. It is daunting and impressive, but if you look behind the curtain there is a tiny little man pulling a whole lot of levers. This very budget (despite being all bark and no bite) was used to galvanize Obama and the liberal base. Remember how Ryan's policies inspired the idea that he would throw grandma off the cliff? Yet despite the proven record of the Left to make a mountain of a molehill team Romney decided to go all-in and select Paul Ryan. More importantly, for what?

In order to understand that Ryan's budget is nothing more than smoke and mirrors we turn to a detailed analysis of the budget. This interactive analysis lets you compare and contrast the Ryan and Obama budgets side by side and examine the projects for spending. Below is a series of images I selected, but I encourage to explore the interactive tool yourself.

First we got Medicaid. Clearly the difference is notable and appreciable. In fact based on this image alone it would almost invalidate all my criticism of the Ryan budget. Medicaid is pure welfare, as opposed to Medicare that is at least partially funded by FICA. Medicaid was always intended to take care of the downtrodden and unfortunate and has now ballooned into health care for all. ObamaCare functions and survives primarily on expanding the Medicaid rolls by shoving more people onto the public dime. Medicaid alone is now responsible for a quarter of many State budgets and continues to financially drain the Federal and State coffers at an alarming rate. Worst of all, it badly distorts the insurance market driving medical prices up for every single individual. So it is nice to see Paul Ryan tackle this egregious and disgusting program that does far more harm than good, but the courage and bravery amount to a spending freeze. By 2021 will be spending more on Medicaid again. Perhaps Ryan tackles the other entitlement programs better?

Next we have Medicare. What's this? Apparently Grandma is not going off a cliff, instead it would appear that she is being pushed up a hill! Ryan's plan spends MORE on Medicare than Obama. This is quite the shock considering that Ryan's plan is considered to be the most courageous entitlement reform evah! It is ironic that Obama and the Left are painting Ryan as the grim reaper chasing your granny, where instead he is slowing down Medicaid to HELP granny. Oh, you have to love politics - don't you?

Next up is Social Security. No, it is not a graphical glitch. Ryan's plan does absolutely nothing for Social Security. Yet conservative websites and pundits swoon over Ryan like he is the next coming of Barry Goldwater, more on that later.

Lastly, the national debt. This is probably not surprising, but after all the hoopla and all the bravado the end result is that the speed at which our fiscal apocalypse arrives is merely slowed down by a teeny weeny bit. Yet one would think that as grandma flies off the cliff with her belongings and rusty wheelchair bouncing off the jagged rocks that America is about to embark on the greatest age of austerity ever devised.

Not really. We have a budget from an individual who thought there was nothing wrong in forking over a blank check to Wall St, nothing wrong with expanding Medicare by half a trillion and nothing wrong with growing a department that Reagan's campaign promised to eliminate. We sure have come a long way, have we not?

So this of course begs the question, why did Romney do this? Why select a VP that will provide such easy ammunition for the Left with virtually no reward? The answer is quite simple. Romney and Ryan represent exactly the same problem even if one appears to be a moderate and the other appears to be an epic fiscal warrior. The Republican party fights for and pushes through the status-quo. The images you see up above and the Ryan record is the status-quo. No doubt about it.

Yet Romney is counting on the ignorance of Republican base to run with the facade of Ryan's conservatism. If that illusion holds then Ryan's image will invariably boost Romney's own image as many will view Romney's decision as courageous and bold despite Obama's willingness to distort Ryan's budget. In other words, you are witnessing a most fantastic and glamorous circus. A bad Hollywood movie, except that ending will be quite real and not something you can pause or turn off.

However we all know what happens when politicians threaten the sacred cows of entitlement spending. They get destroyed. Barry Goldwater was America's last libertarian-Republican candidate and he was obliterated because he dared to speak up against Social Security. Barry's loss paved the way for the great society and the invention of Medicare and Medicaid. How ironic. Poll after poll shows that Americans refuse to accept changes to entitlement programs, despite their clamoring for someone to fix our debt.

Romney and Ryan will lose in November and the image of the heartless Conservative killing granny will resonate with America, the tragedy of course is that neither Ryan or Romney are willing to actually cut anything! The tragedy will become even more amusing as we will witness a nasty and partisan fight further dividing Americans as they fight and defend differing policies with the exact same results.

Romney's campaign is ignoring the lessons of Barry Goldwater and going all-in on an individual that has consistently voted for awful legislation and whose budget is nothing more than smoke and mirrors. A move that can be summarized in one word: desperation.

Apparently the Catholics got mad at Ryan for those quotes and Ryan was later forced to say that he did not believe in the philosophy of Ayn Rand, that it is an atheist philosophy and blah blah blah.

Rand's writing has some very good points but nearly all of her fans (all believing Christians, for example) reject at least part of her Objectivist philosophy.

From the article:

“Poll after poll shows that Americans refuse to accept changes to entitlement programs, despite their clamoring for someone to fix our debt.”

“Romney and Ryan will lose in November and the image of the heartless Conservative killing granny will resonate with America”

This is what the article said. This is almost exactly the same as what the MSM was saying about Republicans throughout 2010 and predicting that they would lose in the midterm elections.

re: “Apparently the Catholics got mad at Ryan for those quotes and Ryan was later forced to say that he did not believe in the philosophy of Ayn Rand, that it is an atheist philosophy and blah blah blah.”

Ryan’s point was that he didn’t have to agree with her views on God in order to agree with her political/economic philosophy. What’s the problem?

“Rand’s writing has some very good points but nearly all of her fans (all believing Christians, for example) reject at least part of her Objectivist philosophy.”

It goes without saying, but Ryan backed off from them totally. Even I would compliment Nietzsche, who, despite the obvious problems, was an enemy of socialist and government and promoted a radical individualism. You take what is good and you spit out the bad. Ryan surrendered it though:

“I reject her philosophy,” Ryan told Robert Costa of the National Review. “It’s an atheist philosophy. It reduces human interactions down to mere contracts and it is antithetical to my worldview.” He added that he had merely “enjoyed a couple of her novels,” which also included another bestseller, “The Fountainhead.”

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-vp-paul-ryan-ayn-rand-20120811,0,1175099.story

Yep, food stamps are included in that number. SS has been running in the red since 2010 and Medicare Part A has been running in the red since 2008. Moreover, Medicare Parts B and D (SMI) premiums only fund 25% of the costs. By law, the General Fund picks up 75% of the costs, which is why Medicare will consume the entire federal budget if it is not reformed. Our aging population will drive the costs upward in a fairly rapid fashion over the next 20 years.

[Tyler Durden is] also the son of a Bulgarian communist intel operative.

ZeroHedge is Soviet agitprop.

Tyler Durden is the name of a character in the movie Fight Club. At last count, more than 40 "editors" were allowed to post using that alias.

Zero Hedge was purportedly founded by several ex-Goldman employees who grew a bit of a conscience. The supposed Bulgarian connection, still mentioned from time to time by MSM rags, was debunked long ago.

More about the organization here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge.

“Catholics got mad at Ryan for those quotes and Ryan was later forced to say that he did not believe in the philosophy of Ayn Rand”

The vast majority of Catholics did not get mad at Ryan. A few left wing academics criticized Rep. Ryan and the MSM falsely claimed that they spoke for Catholics and represented the opinions of most Catholics. Nothing could be further from the truth.

“Ryan’s point was that he didn’t have to agree with her views on God in order to agree with her political/economic philosophy. What’s the problem?”

Well, that isn’t what he actually said.

Yeah, yeah, yeah... he’s done all that and his plan sucks, but it’s better than anything else I have heard recently. Baby steps, baby steps. We just can’t rip everyone off the government teat and expect them to like it. We first have to convince them that the matter is serious, and he’s doing it.

The situation is critical and getting more so. Romney as a businessman, Ryan as a wonk, they see the same problems from both sides and they know it MUST BE SOLVED.

Frankly, given Romney’s tendency to swing swing sharply left at the most irritating times, I was relieved to the point of exhaustion that he chose a Conservative at all!

It could have easily gone to someone that would have us all screaming and ripping our hair out in chunks! Please do remember that.

Both Sarah and Newt came out in favor. I am sure the rest of the Tea Party favorites are not far behind. The mission is DEFEAT OBAMA. There will be time enough for policy meetings and fine tuning — or major revisions — once we win.

But if we don’t win, we’re screwed.

Try not to be such a buzz kill!

The ‘analysis’ is all wet and wrong.
Comparing honest Ryan numbers with fake Obama numbers is apples vs oranges.

The reason Ryan ‘spends more on medicare’ is NOT because Ryan is some big welfare state lib, but Obama STOLE the money to pay for Obamacare! Thankfully some GOP talking heads are playing this up to rebut the phony “Ryan will kill meidcare” meme.

Complaining that Ryan is NOT killing medicare fast enough is ... bizarre.

Romney pick of Ryan shows CONFIDENCE - it means that Romney picked a guy to GOVERN with. Just like Bush did in 2000, he’s not in it to win a particular state, Romney is in it to fix America’s problems and brought a guy on to help him do it.

Really stupid and wrong analysis of a great pick.

Did you even read the article? Even the quotes chosen by the LA Times indicate that a) Ryan likes Rand, b) Ryan rejects Objectivism, c) Ryan sees the importance of defending the rights of the individual against the government, and highlights that as an important theme in Rand's writing.

So what's not to like?

I reject Rand's philosophy, too - don't you?

I see some huge flaws in that analysis. The years for Medicare on the chart only go up 10 years. Well, we all know this plan affects no one over age 55. So the changes won’t take effect for years past where this chart shows.

It is totally and utterly stupid to claim that we’re “giving” the Democrats ammunition to use against us. That is insane. It’s like saying our country inspired militant Muslims to be terrorists. The Democrats are evil and will make up lies about how evil we are whether or not any “ammunition” is provided by us or not.

And that change in Medicaid is huge. As the article says, expansion of Medicaid is by far the worst aspect of Obamacare. The individual mandate is not a budget-buster. In fact, that’s more of a smokescreen Obama is using to claim the bill is about responsibility when it’s really about huge welfare expansion and redistribution of wealth.

No one ever claimed Ryan’s budget dealt with Social Security. Gingrich and Cain had a great reform for Social Security. Bush tried a minor reform and got slapped down for it. I would expect if Romney/Ryan are elected and see some success in the economy, they would try again.

The biggest criticism is of the American people not supporting entitlement reform. Absolutely right. But if the Republicans can’t even win on modest reform, how the heck do you think a huge austerity package is going to win?

Sadly I suspect he’s right on all accounts.

But on the other hand I can’t imagine Washington ever giving up power either way so its not like there ever could be a path to meaningful victory in this Federal(presidential) election.

We need to focus on our State & Local elections to get them ready to resist Washington with any & all means to preserve what little is left of our freedom.

“Washington crossing the Delaware was an act of desperation.

Nothing wrong with that.”

If we extend that analogy then we must presume that the war for our rights will not and cannot be won in this election. That if anything we are simply making a symbolic stand to show & motivate our true countrymen to continue the struggle.

I for one see no path to victory thou Washington. that city, and the people corrupted by its power cannot be turned to respect to restore our rights, and even if it could, it would no sooner restore them than it turns around and take them back with the same supposed power.

If we are to restore and retain our rights, then the means to do so must originate with us & our States not Washington. Otherwise we will be unable to retain them.

“The Ryan plan freezes ... but does not cut ... Medicaid”

And Obama will triple it in cost in 10 years.

“The Ryan plan does not touch Social Security”

It wasnt intended to.

So, apparently the complaint is that the Ryan budget isnt this extreme right-wing budget that would get zero votes in Congress and play into the hands of the Democrats on election time.

Ryan budget was a consensus center-right budget to win the majority in Congress.

The complaints are ignorant doltish ‘analysis’ of the Paultard variety - “hey its not purist enough for me, so its cr*p!” all the while completely failing to properly do the Obama comparison ... IF IT DID, IT WOULD REALIZE THAT THE RYAN BUDGET CUTS THE OBAMA BUDGET PLAN BY $5 TRILLION OVER 10 YEARS!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.