“Republican leaders haven’t come up with “a single, solitary new idea” to help the American people recover from the economic recession.”
Maybe Barack Obama was being Clintonesque parsing “single,” “solitary,” “new” in his mind to justify the lie. I’ll admit that many Republicans have no new ideas and many of them are progressive and probably agree with Obama’s direction, just not his speed. I would argue that the same could be said of Obama’s vision for America. His plan for “spreading the wealth” is not a new idea. His plan has been tried numerous times always with the same result…either failure (see Greece) or totalitarianism (Cuba, Venezuela, etc.).
Shortly after his historic inaugeration President Obama spoke to a gathering of Republican leaders in Baltimore. According to the dead tree media Obama dazzled the stodgy Republicans. You had to be in the habit of getting your news from the alternative media to hear about a Republican legislator from Wisconsin who was underwhelmed by Obama. Our True American Hero is Rep. Paul Ryan who had the audacity to question Obama;
“I serve as a ranking member of the budget committee, so I’m going to talk a little budget if you don’t mind. The spending bills that you’ve signed into law, the domestic discretionary spending has been increased by 84 percent. You now want to freeze spending at this elevated level beginning next year….I would simply submit that we could do more and start now.”
Paul Ryan has been described as the “man with the plan.” Ryan’s Roadmap For America’s Future is a stark contrast from the Obama/Pelosi/Reid plan for ever increasing spending, government control, and staggering deficits. His plan is not a bunch of talking points and he has been forthright in its components giving Democrat operatives the ability to misrepresent its facets. Here we are eighteen months after Obama crossed “swords” with Ryan and the Roadmap still is viable. The progressives cannot make it go away.
I’ll concede that Ryan’s Roadmap may not be a “new” idea as much as ideas that have always worked like cut spending reduce tax rates, take the constraints off our our businesses, etc. He spoke about his plan at a recent speech to the American Enterprise Institute. You can read or watch his entire speech at the link, but his words are inspiring;
“And now we have reached a fork in the road, challenged to make a choice between two paths. And there will be no turning back. The alternative to European-style social welfare unlimited government is still the timeless foundations of America – where government’s high but limited mission is to secure the natural rights of all. In economics, our foundational principles are the basis for free markets, free enterprise, free labor, and competition. Striving for success and achievement – justice – trust: these are inherent elements of human happiness.
I developed my plan – “A Roadmap for America’s Future” – as a fresh approach, but it is guided by the foundational principles of private ownership, individual choice, and consumer-driven markets which Arthur propounded in his book. This isn’t a plan for austerity and pain. It’s a prudent, temperate, achievable, and modest plan for prosperity that fulfills our commitment to the mission of the retirement, health assistance, and other safety net programs.”
Ryan not only has to confront the Democrats, but his own party who seem to be comfortable providing oposition in name only and putting nothing in writing. These are the same Republicans who screwed up so badly that we got the Democrat-controlled government. I have no delusions that many if not most Americans’ eyes will glaze over with detailed talk of economics and the Democrats have been attacking Ryan (a clear indication of his threat) yet his plan still stands even though his opponents misrepresent his work. I had earlier reviewed a work by economist Frederick Bastiat called Economic Sophisms in which he expressed;
“We must confess that our adversaries have a marked advantage over us in the discussion. In very few words they can announce a half-truth; and in order to demonstrate that it is incomplete, we are obliged to have recourse to long and dry dissertations. This arises from the nature of things. Protection concentrates on one point the good which it produces, while the evils which it inflicts are spread over the masses. The one is visible to the naked eye; the other only to the eye of the mind.”
I probably sound like an economic snob quoting a French economist, but I am merely an economic wannabe. I share what I believe is a growing sentiment and understanding that our government’s spending is not just unsustainable, but destructive. We are no longer content with politicians’ ads that misrepresent their opponents views. I hope and believe that Obama’s continual campaign mode will continue to erode support for his risky economic policies.
Ryan not only says the right things, but has a plan and shares his plan…refreshing. I hesitate to place hope in any politician, but Ryan seems like a true American hero. He is certainly one to watch and may have a bright future as a leader and as a target of the Democrat party.
“the case for our founding principles and for free market democracy has always been based on a moral proposition—the equal dignity of every person—the capacity to control or guide our own lives and to grow in self-responsibility to our families, our country, and our Maker. Progressivist plans for a social welfare state are rooted in materialism. They misunderstand human happiness and suppose it can be purchased with redistributed dollars. We seek fulfillment in achievement and work… or earned success… our flourishing in self-government under a limited constitution.
Those who wish to replace the principles that made America exceptional have posed their challenge on several fronts at once—economic, social, international, and even philosophical. All are interconnected, because the moral foundation that supports freedom in one area supports freedom in all. This is a mighty trial over the very meaning and dignity of the human person. In the political domain, the issue comes down to this: Is government to be master or servant?”
Servant! Most certainly SERVANT!