Why Aren’t Republicans Rallying to the Reagan-esque Paul Ryan?

Reader Comments
Back to blog

Ryan is more obstructionism, refusing to recognize the real big picture problems and offering narrow partisan solutions for petty gamesmanship.
We can pass on Ryan's nonsense with a polite No Thanks.

Kyle of VA 7:39PM March 15, 2010

Why not just wait for Rand Paul to get elected to the senate for the state of Kentucky and take his plan for the roadmap? He at least has the conservative roots and principles that his father Ron Paul has given to him to grasp what is necessary for real change. Not for changes sake but for a solution to the problems that now face our nation brought by this Democan and Republicrat congress. Oh and lets not forget the Pretender in Chief Barry!
It almost sounds like you have a sister named Ashley when give stupid opinions in this column Mary Kate.

Jeff of WI 2:14PM March 15, 2010

suffer from "Jekyll - Hyde Syndrome". Whichever one is in power turns into a wild-eyed, spending demon.
I don't believe there is a antidote to the madness other than a Constitutional Amendment for term limits. But in that case those suffering from the insanity have to vote to stop it - I don't see this working out in a happy ending.

R.L. Schaefer of CA 2:00PM March 15, 2010

suffer from "Jekyll - Hyde Syndrome" Which ever is in power turns in to an ear-marked, spending demon.

R.L. Schaefer of CA 1:51PM March 15, 2010

I have just finished reading Ryan's plan and it makes a lot of sense. The arguments that he uses to justify his reasoning are soundly thought out and well defined. While some parts could use some more thought, on the whole this plan makes a lot more sense than the government takeover of what few freedoms we have left.
Why is this idea bad? For people who like big government and its attendant "one size fits no one" directives, the plan requirement of "personal responsibility" contradicts their position. Marxism is a failed concept; get over it! To those who did not attend economics class and therefore have a distorted view of what defines "regressive", please attend class with a Pell grant, or better yet, a course in remedial reading. Try looking at the document as a whole before leaping to the conclusion that it is somehow biased against the disadvantaged among us.
The present course that we are on will contribute to our demise as a power and a society; a course correction is required and required now. The longer that we wait the more painful it will be for all of us. Even if this plan is not perfect it is preferable to enslavement of our children and their grandchildren to finance our excesses. Ryan at least thought about it and came up with something; I might ask critics to do the same.

Ted in NH of NH 4:55PM March 14, 2010

I would ignore Ryan too. His idea of a "fair tax" is the regressive value added consumption tax. His cuts would come on the upper end of the scale making it a double regressive tax plan. If you want to stagnate the economy for decades to come then listen to Paul Ryan. Otherwise just ignore what the poor sap has to say.

DallasNE of NE 1:48AM March 14, 2010

The Democrats don't get it. It doesn't matter what they do - raise taxes, cut taxes, pass a health care plan, drop the health care plan, get tough on terror, continue to be wimps on defense, it doesn't matter. It's too late. They will have to pack their suitcases next January.

dolleybird of TX 10:39PM March 13, 2010

Why was it "the only time the GOP pushed back against George W. Bush was when he tried to privatize Social Security."
Explan, gives reasons. I can say Bush vetoed a war budget. That is true. It just doesn't give reason. Some might say Bush was against war, which would be wrong assumption. Bush reason was he warned he would veto if too much PORK was in the bill.
So please, give reasons. There are some wonderful private S/S in a few Texas counties with many extra advantages. They are in the black and pay more.

Bill Hedges of MO 3:48PM March 13, 2010

Paul Ryan's "roadmap" involves privatizing Medicare and issuing decreasing value vouchers instead. No one currently under the age of 55 would be eligible for Medicare. If the GOPers embrace Ryan's plan, they'd go the way of the Whigs. Keep in mind, the only time the GOP pushed back against George W. Bush was when he tried to privatize Social Security.
Ryan is "Reaganesque" in that he voted for every lamebrained, fiscally irresponsble, Reaganomic piece of budget garbage ever sent to him by George W. Bush.
Paul Ryan's voting record is a Roadmap for America's Failure.

jimatmadison of WI 3:11PM March 13, 2010

You are correct we lost jobs, but that was not because of tax cuts. Tax cuts did enrich the coffers.
Let me explain.
Bill Clinton caused recession:
"Almost no one realizes that this entire subprime lending mess was created by the Community Reinvestment Act, which was passed by President Carter, a Democrat, in 1977. Later on in the 1990s, Bill Clinton, another Democrat, passed laws to enforce the original bill. The purpose of the CRA is to force banks to make risky loans to people who can’t afford to repay those loans."
http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2009/02/22/democrats-caused-the-recession-and-republicans-tried-to-stop-it/
"In fact, the Bush tax cuts actually increased government revenue. According to economist Brian Reidl of the Heritage Foundation, The Laffer Curve (upon which much of the supply-side theory is based) merely formalizes the common sense observations that"
•1." Tax revenues depend on the tax base as well as the tax rate,
•2. Raising tax rates discourages the taxed behavior and therefore shrinks the tax base, offsetting some of the revenue gains, and
•3. Lowering tax rates encourages the taxed behavior and expands the tax base, offsetting some of the revenue loss."
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/lying_about_bushs_tax_cuts.html
History shows tax cuts improve the economy. Tax cuts of Kennedy/Reagan/Bush gave up the longest Bull Market in American History. Lowering tax on rich increases government revenue:
http://www.heritage.org/research/taxes/wm327.cfm
"GDP Growth after tax cuts"
"After the recession in 2001 and the first round of tax cuts, economic growth speeded up and is expected to pickup even faster in 2004:3"
"•The real annual GDP growth rate increased from 0.3 percent in 2001 to 2.5 percent in 2002.
•In the third quarter of 2003, GDP grew at a 7.2 percent annual rate.
•Forecasters are expecting GDP to grow by 4.6 percent in 2004, the highest in 20 years.
•2003 and 2004 economic growth levels surpassed Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates by 150 basis combined, resulting in $300 billion of additional growth, which is roughly $2,500 per household."
http://taxesandgrowth.ncpa.org/news/are-the-bush-tax-cuts-working
The economic collapse occurred because of bad sub-prime loans caused by Clinton. F/F sold the bad home loans to Banks that destroyed our economy.
Unlike you, I have provided my proof. Answering your remarks.
To prove Bush warned of recession and that Democrats denied need for regulations, here is video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPSDnGMzIdo
I have proved my case, unless you have anything to question or prove.