Nice Pick, Mitt!: Romney-Ryan Ticket a Winner

Mitt Romney’s choice of House Budget chairman Paul Ryan from Wisconsin for VP shows wisdom and the depth of the Republican team.

Mitt Romney promised to pick a conservative for a running mate, and he has delivered. Paul Ryan is already nationally known, having proposed concrete solutions for America’s financial future, including reforming entitlement spending. He will help keep the focus on the most important issue in this year’s election: the long term solutions for America’s economy.

Paul Ryan will help, not hurt Romney’s chances of returning the President to the where Obama can most help the economy. President Obama is likable and charismatic; he can sell books and earn large amounts for speeches as a private citizen.

Obama’s policies have only hurt the economy and prolonged the Great Recession, much like Franklin Roosevelt’s policies prolonged the Great Depression in the 1930s.

Ryan a better pick than Rubio

Many conservatives had favored Senator Marco Rubio of Florida to be Romney’s running mate. He could deliver Florida and bring more Hispanic voters to the GOP, whose traditional social values fit more with Republicans than with the Democrat party.

But Rubio is needed in the Senate, where fellow conservatives Rand Paul (KY), Jim DeMint (SC), recent Tea Party primary victor Ted Cruz of Texas and others need his support. An open seat in Florida could go to a more liberal Republican like Charlie Crist.

Paul Ryan can be replaced in the House much more easily than Rubio in the Senate. A competent accountant can manage the budget; America has plenty of them in the private sector. We need more like Martin Howrylak in legislatures and Congress, where they can promote government transparency.

Private Sector Accounting for Government

Perhaps they could persuade fellow legislators to adopt General Accounting Principles and submit their books to independent auditors like bankrupt New York City was forced to do by the state in 1976.

Now the tables are turned and the city is in good financial shape and could help the state’s miserable finances – if it agreed to keep honest books.

This is described as the second point of five in Economic Lessons from American History in Imprimis magazine, with almost two million monthly readers, available free from Hillsdale College.

More Respect for Ryan

Paul Ryan can still advocate for his ideas as Vice President, and won’t be ignored or disdained like he is now.

Marco Rubio has Presidential aspirations of his own, which would prove a distraction during the campaign, as the press would be focusing on that rather than the current issues facing our country.

Rubio may well one day be our first Hispanic President, but his path will probably not be Vice President.

Ryan can help Romney in the Rust Belt

Paul Ryan is from Janesville, Wisconsin, home of the closed GM Suburban plant. So he understands the pain of autoworkers who have lost their jobs and is popular enough to be elected there. He can help in key battleground states like Ohio and Pennsylvania and may even help Romney take Michigan.

Congressman Ryan is as likable as President Obama and is not an ideologue. He is self-effacing and modest, even-tempered, yet can debate strongly on economic issues, because unlike Democrats, he has brought forward a viable plan.

Handwriting on the Wall for Obama

Despite his significant advantage in funds for TV ads, President Obama faces a challenge for reelection. Democrats are already distancing themselves from him, with some Congressmen not even coming to the convention in North Carolina.

Bill Clinton’s quote of Romney’s stellar business record will be replayed by the Republicans in ads. Giving Clinton a prominent role at the convention highlights that Obama is in trouble, since everyone knows that Hillary wants to challenge Romney in 2016 if Obama loses.

Vice Presidential Debate will be Interesting

The vice presidential debate should get high TV ratings this year. Vice President Biden will be hopelessly outmatched, with Paul Ryan bringing data to the table to counter Biden’s rhetoric. Biden has been in Washington so long he doesn’t remember how real people live.

Iconic Initials

Like Romney-Rubio, Romney-Ryan also has the iconic initials RR. Ronald Reagan’s legacy should be alluded to and capitalized on. This is style, not substance, but sloganeering sometimes helps win elections.

“Hope and change” worked for Obama in 2008. Now all America has is dashed hopes, and many of us are digging for spare change. Meanwhile, Obama continues to blame his predecessor and ask for more time for his raising taxes and borrowing to spend even more to take hold.

Franklin Roosevelt’s Policies Revisited

But can we afford four more years of FDR’s policies in the 21st century? TIME magazine’s November 24, 2008 cover story showed Obama smoking a cigarette with FDR’s signature cigarette holder; the article linked Obama’s policies with Roosevelt’s New Deal.

Most economists now agree that the haphazard and sometimes unconstitutional policies of the New Deal prolonged the Depression, not relieved it. World War II brought America out of the Great Depression, not the New Deal.

Media Bias and War Chest will Help Obama

President Obama and his surrogates wasted no time in painting Ryan as an extremist, when in fact they are the ones gutting Medicare by diverting funds to people who have never paid in to the system. Don’t expect most of the to ask any tough questions about it, though.

The President will use his large advantage in advertising funds to continue misrepresenting Republicans as wanting dirty air and water, throwing seniors under the bus etc., not denouncing the SuperPAC ad that accused Mitt Romney of causing someone’s death from cancer. Non-partisan fact checkers agreed this was untrue, and the Democratic party chair backpedaled but claimed she had no control over the content of the ad. So much for civility.

However, in the debate Paul Ryan will get the chance to tell the American people directly that his plan to reform Medicare did not change anything for people over fifty-five. Patient truth telling will reveal who is telling the big lie.


Paul Ryan’s key point of whether we are going to pass a bankrupt nation on to our kids and grandkids will resonate. His own three children will also be better off with him having a more relaxed job as Vice President.

The sooner we do something to solve our 40% overspending problem and stop the trillion dollar deficits the easier it will be to dig out of the hole. Digger a deeper hole by borrowing more money is not the solution. We can’t “owe our soul to the company store.” There is no one to bail us out but ourselves.

We have to do something now. Getting started in January is much better than waiting another four years for a new President if Obama is reelected.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Cristian Teodoridis August 14, 2012 at 02:57 AM
Great analysis Dale! Another well written article, congratulations!
Brian August 14, 2012 at 11:29 AM
very well stated' thorough and articulate. nice work.
SharonP August 14, 2012 at 02:03 PM
Regurgitated drivel by a blind follower who has amazingly skewed views on media bias and American history. This piece by Dale exudes the media bias he bemoaned in his last Patch.com article. Remember Dale saying, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Bill O'Reilly are all squarely centered on the right. Not "far" right. Just right. Meanwhile, Dale and his like-minded hard-liners are adamant that while Glenn Beck is not "far right" that Chris Matthews, and people like him, they are not just left, but "FAR LEFT." If you keep drinking it, Dale will keep serving it. It helps wash done the denial.
GambitofTroy August 14, 2012 at 05:48 PM
If you would like to see a quick 50 examples of Liberal Main Stream Media Bias please see the following link... http://www.westernjournalism.com/top-50-examples-liberal-media-bias/
Neal Charness August 14, 2012 at 10:06 PM
I don't see any point in trying to change the opinions of Dale or the posters. For those who don't have hard and fast opinions consider very carefully what most works in your favor. The Romney/Ryan party can only win if they convince enough voters to vote against their own interests by scaring them about health care when there is no viable alternative to the ACA. Does perpetuating the Bush temporary tax reduction for people earning over $250,000 help you? How many small business owners really make more than $250,000 in taxable income after the deductions allowable. So when there are silly rants about hurting small business, know that true small business owners aren't the ones whose tax cuts would be affected. What are your interests? Who best represents them?
John David August 14, 2012 at 10:30 PM
Three recent past comments of Dale Murrish on Mitt Romney: "One gets the sense that Romney cares more about getting elected than telling the truth." "Many support Romney because they say he’s the only candidate who can beat Obama. This logic is faulty, because he lost to John McCain last primary election, who was defeated easily in November. Romney is well known now; what makes people think the loser to a loser can defeat an incumbent President? Romney is also the most like Obama of any of the Republican candidates." "Admitting you’re wrong like Santorum has is better than sticking to your guns like Romney has on Romneycare." So, Romney is a liar (doesn't tell the truth), not a true conservative (the most like Obama), and can't admit error. I guess the only thing Dale thinks Romney has done correctly is to select a VP candidate who voted for TARP and for the auto bailouts (one of 32 GOP representatives) which Romney didn't support and can't admit he was wrong about. I didn't and won't vote for Obama, but I don't think that Dale has made a case for Romney or that the addition of Ryan really makes it likely that Romney will be elected.
DCC August 14, 2012 at 11:08 PM
"Congressman Ryan is as likable as President Obama and is not an ideologue." Really? REALLY?!? Well, if you say so, but he sounded quite ideological when he said "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. And the fight we are in here—make no mistake about it—is a fight of individualism versus collectivism."
Dale Murrish August 14, 2012 at 11:39 PM
You're picking and choosing. He was inspired by her fictional characters but rejects her atheistic ideology. Being ideological and being an ideologue are two different things.
Dale Murrish August 14, 2012 at 11:41 PM
Correction: idealistic, not ideological: I meant to say: Being idealistic and being an ideologue are two different things.
Dale Murrish August 14, 2012 at 11:46 PM
Why don’t you all build up those you favor instead of throwing rocks at those you oppose? Because it’s easier to throw rocks. Are you Builders or Wreckers? You can write your own columns in favor of Obama and the mystery candidate you’re running against Mayor Daniels if you want; Jen Anesi is open to new bloggers. You could provide some balance to my “biased” articles. Mitt Romney was my first choice in 2008 and my second choice after Rick Santorum this year. I was critical of how he went after his nearest challenger in the campaign. The comment John David quoted was referring to one particular incident. Romney/Ryan will be far better for the country than four more years of 40% overspending. President Obama should be returned to the private sector where he can help the economy far more than he is doing now. He is taking the country in the wrong direction: toward socialism and a perpetually weak economy saddled by high debt, maybe even bankruptcy. But he will be long gone before the chickens come home to roost, even if he is reelected. You might follow the link above on Media Bias if you are skeptical of my opinions about it. You could also see the movie 2016, which opens this weekend, for an alternate view of Obama’s plans for the country if he is reelected.
DCC August 15, 2012 at 12:56 AM
Idealistic? Vizzini: He didn't fall?! Inconceivable! Inigo: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. w.r.t. Paul Ryan, the guy who voted for every Bush spending bill he could before finding solace in the fiction that obstructing President Obama was a necessity, idealistic does not apply.
DCC August 15, 2012 at 01:18 AM
Dale, if you offer your thoughts in a public forum, and they contain lies like "Despite his significant advantage in funds for TV ads, President Obama faces a challenge for reelection.", it would be a crime against truth itself to not respond. Rmoney is not at any disadvantage w.r.t. money. As for your "media bias" tome you wrote, I had already read it, and replied http://farmington-mi.patch.com/blog_posts/media-bias-deliberate-and-unintentional#comment_4019054 Rmoney's hidden tax returns and vague policy pronouncements, his now abandoned attempt to make the election a mere referendum on President Obama's without offering a single specific, and his embrace of Ryan's disastrous "budget" to not build the image of a good president.
DCC August 15, 2012 at 01:24 AM
One last thing - a guy who knows his way around budgets and finance, Republican David Stockman, has condemned the Ryan plan: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/14/ex-reagan-budget-director_n_1776063.html
Center America August 15, 2012 at 01:30 AM
I vote from the center. I supported Obama last election. I'm going to support Romney, this time around, reluctantly. Look... One thing you cannot argue about Ryan, is that he is deperately trying to balance the budget. SO WHAT if he is far far right economically. JUST because he is, doesn't mean he is going to get his way and majically transform our country into the land of Rand. The point is, like Clinton, he feels obligated to spend OUR MONEY wisely. He'll have to make ALL KINDS of compromises that will protect you from your greatest fear... Meanwhile he'll get what he wants (by helping Mitt)... a balanced budget. All I know is everything we have tried up to this point has FAILED. We need fresh eyes looking at the problem. Time for a change... Spoken from the independant center. (Regardless of what Clinton says, I bet the man respects Ryan more than anyone else on either ticket. My guess.)
Jeff S. August 15, 2012 at 01:50 AM
I have two sisters who have used in-vitro fertilization to have children. They would not have been able to have children without the procedure. Because of the procedure I have four wonderful nieces and nephews. The Sanctity of Human Life Act (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr227), co-sponsored by Rep. Ryan, would serve to OUTLAW in-vitro fertilization. Paul Ryan dares to tell me that my nieces and nephews shouldn't have been born. You see Dale, it's not us posters who are "throwing rocks" or "wrecking" Paul Ryan. We're just pointing out the facts that you have conveniently omitted. On the contrary, Paul Ryan and his ultra-conservative allies (like yourself) are the ones trying to wreck our families by injecting their own religious dogma into our lives.
DCC August 15, 2012 at 02:07 AM
Center wrote "One thing you cannot argue about Ryan, is that he is deperately trying to balance the budget. " Actually, that IS one of the things argued about Ryan. Check out http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/14/ex-reagan-budget-director_n_1776063.html “Mr. Ryan’s sonorous campaign rhetoric about shrinking Big Government and giving tax cuts to 'job creators' (read: the top 2 percent) will do nothing to reverse the nation’s economic decline and arrest its fiscal collapse. ... Mr. Ryan’s plan is devoid of credible math or hard policy choices.” You might want to consider that the economic plan illusion being offered by Romney/Ryan is just that, an illusion. Looking at Ryan's "personhood" fetish, the one Romney co-signed, should make it clear that the two have left "the center", if not reality altogether.
John David August 15, 2012 at 02:58 AM
Dale, like Darryl and Jeff S., the point isn't rock throwing but identifying errors and inconsistencies in your "columns". You probably read other blogs, and you must know opposing comments are routine. You have the right to your opinion, but you should expect critical feedback, not just praise from those who think as you do. And I quoted not one but three negative comments you made about Romney during the primaries in your blog - your views that he is dishonest, closer to Obama than any other Republican in the primaries, and incapable of admitting error. Yet you seem to have forgotten your own stated views about him. At least admit you did not want Romney, but are now willing to sing the praises of a ticket headed by a man you said lies to achieve what he wants, is not a true conservative, and has a troubling inability to admit when he is wrong.
SharonP August 15, 2012 at 02:05 PM
Garbage. Pure garbage. Anyone who reads this "Top 50 examples of liberal media bias" and thinks it makes anything other than a poor case for an extremist point-of-view is not too bright. Just look at the titles of the posts on this Far-Right biased website: "Newt Gingrich Nukes CNN Host"; "House Republicans Give Obama more Dictatorial Power"; "Obama's Filthiest Lie Ever?"; "Reporter has Documented Proof Obama is a Indonesian Citizen" (and all this time Glenn Beck thought he was born in Africa); "The Scandal That Ends The Obama Presidency"; "Was Colorado Shooting Staged by the Government?" Sorry, Dale but it is absurd to blame the Soviet Union's past evils on the USA's Liberal Media. Same goes for blaming Fidel Castro and the Cuba situation on liberal media reporting. Frankly, it's a crazy suggestion. Why not just blame Adolf Hitler's rise to power and all of WWII on the American Liberal Media, "Why, if Rush Limbaugh were on-air in the 1930s do you think he would have let the Japanese sneak attack Pearl Harbor? Heck no, he would have rallied America around Conservative values that would have led us to attacking much earlier..." It's almost as if fans of Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaguh and Bill O'Reilly truly believe that said talking heads provide balanced news reports (I know Dale does). I never see CNN or MSNBC on a TV screen in a bar or restaurant in Metro-Detroit. Go to Chilli's or any other place and it's FOX NEWS. So how is that playing into media bias?
Frank Cusumano August 15, 2012 at 05:48 PM
I find it difficult to swallow the Aryn Rand apostles' hypocrisy in the GOP. As a Christian I find her well known and publicized atheistic beliefs to be blasphemy. Yet, the so-called conservatives will turn a blind eye to it, and pick and choose what they like. And what they like is the so-called "rugged individualism" when it comes to cutting social programs but, again, turn a blind eye to corporate communism, e.g. the Airline Bailout, the S&L Bail Out, the Insurance Bailout, and the Bank Bailout, to name a few. In fact when regulation destroys all meaningful competition then principles of "free markets" are thrown overboard. Paul Rand claims to be a Catholic. The College of Catholic American Bishops on April 16, 2012 to the House Agriculture Committee to: "resist for moral and human reasons unacceptable cuts to hunger and nutrition programs... protect essential programs that serve poor and hungry people over subsidies that assist large and relatively well-off agricultural enterprises." They continued that cuts to food stamps “are unjustified and wrong. If cuts are necessary, the committee should first look towards reducing and targeting commodity and subsidy programs that disproportionately go to large growers and agribusiness." "Adequate nutrition is essential to protect human life and dignity. We urge support for just and sufficient funding for agriculture policies that serve hungry, poor and vulnerable people.." Once the babies are born, let them starve.
Sharon August 16, 2012 at 12:28 AM
Wow! Excellent, accurate and smart. I heard someone call Ryan a social moderate and compare him to Jack Kemp. Um. No.
Sharon August 16, 2012 at 12:33 AM
I also find it very mysterious that people can ignore Rand's atheism when it is an absolute cornerstone of her concept of individualism and freedom. I think Ayn Rand would spit in the faces of those who, like Dale and Ryan, claim to be all for individual freedom, and personal liberties, yet want to base American law on the bible no matter what the rest of us think. You want the best of all worlds, Dale -- the rest of us are free to do whatever we want, as long as you approve. Doesn't sound much like freedom and individualism to me.
DCC August 16, 2012 at 02:08 AM
Sharon, you are correct: Ayn Rand was a huge supporter of women having access to abortion, so yes, she'd disavow faux objectivists like Ryan. She'd also reject the establishment of an American Taliban.
Sammy V. August 16, 2012 at 01:54 PM
It's crazy to think that two of the biggest Conservative Icons of ALL TIME -- Ayn Rand and Rush Limbaugh -- are/were raging, out-of-control drug addicts. Ayn Rand abused amphetamines for 30-years. Rush Limbaugh is an admitted OxyContin (opiate) addict. Limbaugh was so addicted to hillbilly heroin that he was arrested for "doctor shopping" 2003. The conservative values icon had bought thousands of OxyContin painkillers during the police investigation. Oh, and John McCain's wife was/is a thieving, pill popping drug addict, too.
Inner Voice August 16, 2012 at 03:17 PM
Living in a world outside of reality is a very painful experience. The drugs are no surprise.
Ardy August 20, 2012 at 03:14 PM
This "opinion piece:" is poorly written, and is far some factual or personal opinion. It's just garbage to fill space and create hits on this website. Nothing more, or less.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something