Dick Armey to GOP: Why don’t you have the guts to support Paul Ryan’s roadmap?

posted at 4:30 pm on August 22, 2010 by Allahpundit

A sizzlin’ piece of red meat for a slow Sunday afternoon. Things start to pick up halfway through the clip, but I recommend watching the whole thing lest you miss Granholm’s ode to government intervention and insistence that cutting spending so that we don’t have to keep borrowing from foreign creditors is somehow … playing right into China’s hands. Note also that she’s the one who brings up Ryan, not Armey; Gregory’s question has to do with tea-party candidates being out of the mainstream and she leaps from that to an attack on the roadmap. Partly that’s because Dems are in panic mode about losing seniors’ votes and figure that distorting Ryan’s plan is the best way to spook them into voting blue this fall. But as I’ve said before, part of it is also a function of Ryan being a serious policy thinker who’s not given to the sort of rhetorical excess that lends itself to the left’s “all conservatives are kooks” message. If they want to take him down, they’ll have to do it with guilt by association. Which is why he keeps making these surprise cameos in their Sharron Angle/Rand Paul messaging.

As for Armey, who offers a welcome defense of Ryan, two things. One: I’d be remiss if I didn’t note that he’s mistaken about Alvin Greene. America’s candidate has been indicted on a felony charge but not (yet) convicted. (Or is he referring to someone else?) Second, I wonder how much support there’d be even on the right for the congressional GOP deciding to suddenly rally behind Ryan’s roadmap. I figure most tea partiers would love it as a show of fiscal conservative principle; centrists, who are loath to tinker with Social Security and Medicare, would likely freak out; and a third faction in the middle would welcome the move from a policy standpoint but would panic at the thought of Republicans handing the Dems a major opportunity to change the subject when they’re on the ropes. But then, that’s the problem with entitlements writ large, isn’t it? Everyone agrees that we need to talk about them — just not right now, when it’s politically inconvenient. Someday.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

No offense, but Dick had a chance to put his politics where his mouth is when he was in Republican leadership, he bailed instead. It’s always easier to kibitz from the bleachers.

jnelchef on August 22, 2010 at 6:42 PM

No thank you. As far as I’m concerned, anyone who voted for both TARP and stimulus signed their own political death certificate with me.

gryphon202 on August 22, 2010 at 6:10 PM

Point of order – while Ryan voted for TARP, he did not vote for Porkulus.

steveegg on August 22, 2010 at 6:43 PM

Is the argument that illegal aliens are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US? If not, can the US legally arrest and detain them?

DarkCurrent on August 22, 2010 at 6:40 PM

Well, you see, it’s not jurisdiction jurisdiction.

/Whoopi

JohnGalt23 on August 22, 2010 at 6:44 PM

I wish I was there with her…. :)
I would have said:

“with all due respect, governor, if the state of Michigan is an incubator for America, I have to break it to you that the patient has died.

It’s time to unplug the machine and perform the funeral, not go about bragging that Michigan has turned the corner like some kind of recovery summer.”

golfmann on August 22, 2010 at 6:53 PM

Kind of a circular question, no? They don’t have the guts because they don’t have the guts.

rrpjr on August 22, 2010 at 7:01 PM

Granholm – destroyer of the Michigan economy – has some balls to be on television doing anything but apologizing/resigning.

Midas on August 22, 2010 at 7:02 PM

canopfor on August 22, 2010 at 6:38 PM

I see you have been perusing Theo Spark website..It is cool..:)..It has some really good stuff for airplane junkies..:)

Dire Straits on August 22, 2010 at 7:03 PM

Let’s play word association………when I say” roadmap”
you say “contract with America”……sounds way too much like
a Gingrich do over. Let’s just stick with a win and take the wheel.
No roadmaps, no contracts, just some common sense and
perhaps a Dick Armey flat tax hmmmm

justonevictory on August 22, 2010 at 7:04 PM

steveegg on August 22, 2010 at 6:40 PM

+1..very good point!..:)

Dire Straits on August 22, 2010 at 7:05 PM

Granholm – destroyer of the Michigan economy – has some balls to be on television doing anything but apologizing/resigning.

Midas on August 22, 2010 at 7:02 PM

Well put. If Obama is still around in 2013, expect to see JenJen in a more conspicuous role…

cynccook on August 22, 2010 at 7:07 PM

Granholm – destroyer of the Michigan economy – has some balls to be on television doing anything but apologizing/resigning.

Midas on August 22, 2010 at 7:02 PM

It’s her “farewell tour” to salvage her tenure. Her FB is replete with stuff to this effect.

lansing quaker on August 22, 2010 at 7:13 PM

Testing post

Key West Reader on August 22, 2010 at 7:18 PM

“That he did, enrolling in the Masters program at the University of North Dakota in 1963. From there it was on to the University of Oklahoma and a Ph.D. in economics.”

“The American people didn’t give us power, they gave us responsibility.”

If I were you…

… I would listen to this guy.

Seven Percent Solution on August 22, 2010 at 7:18 PM

Sorry…

… I forgot the Linky.

Seven Percent Solution on August 22, 2010 at 7:19 PM

Testing post

Key West Reader on August 22, 2010 at 7:18 PM

A+ ?

cynccook on August 22, 2010 at 7:20 PM

Well put. If Obama is still around in 2013, expect to see JenJen in a more conspicuous role…

cynccook on August 22, 2010 at 7:07 PM

The scary thing to me is that her name was being floated for the Supreme Court..*shudders*

Dire Straits on August 22, 2010 at 7:23 PM

The scary thing to me is that her name was being floated for the Supreme Court..*shudders*

Dire Straits on August 22, 2010 at 7:23 PM

Thankfully she was overqualified for the job

TheVer on August 22, 2010 at 7:24 PM

Thankfully she was overqualified for the job

TheVer on August 22, 2010 at 7:24 PM

…and, sadly for her, underpigmented.

cynccook on August 22, 2010 at 7:27 PM

I wish I was there with her…. :)
I would have said:

“with all due respect, governor, if the state of Michigan is an incubator for America, I have to break it to you that the patient has died.

It’s time to unplug the machine and perform the funeral, not go about bragging that Michigan has turned the corner like some kind of recovery summer.”
golfmann on August 22, 2010 at 6:53 PM

Excellent repartee, golfmann!

Your observation ties back to what I had said earlier. Armey should have pointed to other states that serve as laboratories for economic success, the ones that are not so dependent on federal pork, high taxes, and regulation.

Armey might also have pointed out that the bailouts for corporations and state budgets have only reinforced fiscal irresponsibility in those entities.

The GOP has to frame the argument about the imminent collapse of SS and Medicare and the ways to solve the problem in a way that does not scare current seniors. The Left is grabbing on to a false narrative, acting as if SS will be snatched away pronto if the GOP has its way.

Ryan’s plan protects those who have contributed to FICA up to a certain age and those who are currently beneficiaries of SS. If something is not done soon, both groups will be losers in the very near future. The selling point has to be made for younger people to be in charge of their own futures.

Surely, the GOP can hammer home the point that ObaMaoCare already adversely affects the health care of seniors enrolled in Medicare. O-care cuts out the choices for seniors who want to enroll in Medicare Advantage, for example. It also will decrease the number of health care providers willing to service an older population. There are plenty of facts to support that claim, and Ryan’s plan for health insurance certainly provided better options and addressed the real issues regarding insurance coverage.

onlineanalyst on August 22, 2010 at 8:02 PM

you guys can say all you want about Ryan and TARP but at night I close my eyes and pretend he is my rep instead of Ms. Baldwin.

sammypants on August 22, 2010 at 8:04 PM

The problem with any government program is that it’s run by the government. We must get out of the business of ruining people’s lives by trying to run them.

Mojave Mark on August 22, 2010 at 8:06 PM

That screen cap of Granholm epitomizes what disgusts me about Lefties. They are always pointing fingers (forgetting that three fingers are pointing back to them.)

onlineanalyst on August 22, 2010 at 8:11 PM

sammypants on August 22, 2010 at 8:04 PM

LOL + 1000 Thought I was the only one. Do you know that you can only email him via his Congressional office if you live in his district? LOL

cynccook on August 22, 2010 at 8:13 PM

That screen cap of Granholm epitomizes what disgusts me about Lefties. They are always pointing fingers (forgetting that three fingers are pointing back to them.)

onlineanalyst on August 22, 2010 at 8:11 PM

With all due respect, one of those is her mole, not a finger, so I guess only two of her fingers can be pointing back at her. Good point, though.

cynccook on August 22, 2010 at 8:14 PM

Paul Ryan the scam artist.
michellemalkin on bailouts

GOP Rep. Paul Ryan: “This bill offends my principles, but I’m going to vote for this bill to preserve my principles…If we fail to do the right thing, heaven help us…We’re one month from this election. Unfortunately, a majority will have to vote for this. For me and my own conscience…I want to know that I did everything I could…As bad as this is, it could get a whole lot worse…”

Ron Paul 2012 not Paul Ryan

Spathi on August 22, 2010 at 8:29 PM

O/T
but you might want to see this about the spineless GOPers

A California Republican Party committee today blocked debate on a controversial resolution in support of Arizona’s anti-illegal immigration law, drawing complaints from delegates who say Meg Whitman’s campaign is seeking to stifle debate on a hot-button issue.

The resolution, which would affirm the party’s support for the Arizona law and Proposition 187, the 1994 initiative to cut public benefits for undocumented immigrants, died in committee when none of its 12 members seconded a motion for debate. Supporters could still push for a floor vote during the Sunday general session of the CRP’s semi-annual convention, but would need two-thirds approval for adoption.

http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2010/08/crp-committee-blocks-action-on.html

Today they dissociated themselves from AZ ‘s SB 1070

macncheez on August 22, 2010 at 8:31 PM

BTW there are no 62,000 jobs from the battery companies in Michigan. It’s more like 600 jobs and the rest may come ifffff they can make any money, which won’t happen. Why is anyone asking the governor for the past 12year of the State with worst economic condition in the country, about the economy? Is David Gregory an idiot, or is this the best the Dems can put out there?

flytier on August 22, 2010 at 8:37 PM

Why do we always have to have “A PLAN”.

Why not get an agreement about what the problems are or what our priorities should be. Wouldn’t that make a little more sense than another 2,000 page bill (and I don’t mean to demean Paul Ryan at all. He’s a genius, a patriot, and his plan probably would be a good starting point.)

How’s about we agree that our priorities shoud be something like:

- National Security
- Supporting our allies
- Avoiding national bankruptcy
- Creating an environment that encourages job creation
- Following the Constitution
- Maintaining a safety net for those who need it the most
- Making Social Security and Medicare self-sustaining
- Encouraging the private sector rather than government
- Educating the public about this great country and culture

There are probably many other good ones.

But what good is a plan if you don’t even state the problem or the goals that the plan is supposed to address.

notagool on August 22, 2010 at 8:40 PM

Today they dissociated themselves from AZ ’s SB 1070

macncheez on August 22, 2010 at 8:31 PM

That makes me want to throw up…

Seven Percent Solution on August 22, 2010 at 8:45 PM

Ron Paul 2012 not Paul Ryan

Spathi on August 22, 2010 at 8:29 PM

Yeah…no. Ron Paul has more baggage than Paris Hilton on a summer vacation to Fiji.

amerpundit on August 22, 2010 at 8:55 PM

Point of order – while Ryan voted for TARP, he did not vote for Porkulus.

steveegg on August 22, 2010 at 6:43 PM

Was I confusing porkulus with the auto bailouts? All the unconstitutional profligate whorehouse government spending looks the same to me.

gryphon202 on August 22, 2010 at 8:56 PM

Dick Armey can’t be trusted,

gary4205 on August 22, 2010 at 9:04 PM

That makes me want to throw up…

Seven Percent Solution on August 22, 2010 at 8:45 PM

The CA-GOP seems to have developed cold feet over their
prospects of winning both Gov and Sen election .
Are they scared that they might actually win in CA ? Are they so unprepared for public support that they want to actively sabotage it when they see it coming ?
Why ???
Maybe someone in GOP will bother to explain what they have against SB 1070 that they don’t even want to discuss it AMONGST THEMSELVES
Wusses them all

macncheez on August 22, 2010 at 9:05 PM

It’s tough to carry on an intellectual debate when it’s 2 against 1. Gregory’s questions were loaded.

Vince on August 22, 2010 at 9:05 PM

Reagan raised the starting age for SS, why can’t these Repubs?

The only thing that worries me about a voluntary program is you are going to have a lot of people blowing their money and then at age 65 begging to be covered without paying in. Acorn will represent them, I’m sure.

So it’s all or nothing, IMHO, and raise the starting age again.

PattyJ on August 22, 2010 at 9:05 PM

So it’s all or nothing, IMHO, and raise the starting age again.

PattyJ on August 22, 2010 at 9:05 PM

Reagan made that, and other concessions to a Democratically held congress. In doing so, he merely postponed the inevitable. I have to believe that he realized that.

Back then, we could arguably afford to pass the ball down to the next generation. Now we simply can’t. The situation in D.C. is utterly untenable.

gryphon202 on August 22, 2010 at 9:07 PM

Reagan raised the starting age for SS, why can’t these Repubs?

Yeah, I’m 60. It feels like I’ve got a fishing pole stuck down my back and on the line dangling up front is “age eligible for social security.” I’ll never catch it.

Vince on August 22, 2010 at 9:11 PM

I’m 60. It feels like I’ve got a fishing pole stuck down my back and on the line dangling up front is “age eligible for social security.” I’ll never catch it.

Vince on August 22, 2010 at 9:11 PM

I’m 32, Vince. My fishing line is a long one.

Social security is broke. It’s not a matter of if. It’s not a matter of when. It’s only a matter of how long the pols can keep lying to us about it.

gryphon202 on August 22, 2010 at 9:15 PM

Reagan raised the starting age for SS, why can’t these Repubs?

The only thing that worries me about a voluntary program is you are going to have a lot of people blowing their money and then at age 65 begging to be covered without paying in. Acorn will represent them, I’m sure.

So it’s all or nothing, IMHO, and raise the starting age again.

PattyJ on August 22, 2010 at 9:05 PM
I would wager that almost no one actually has bothered to read Paul Ryan’s Roadmap. The simple fact of the matter is that the government confiscates money for FICA from every paycheck in this country every time one is issued. They take it whether you like it or not with the promise that it will be invested for your retirement. Guess what the average return on that investment is? Currently between 1 and 2%. Future generations can expect less than 1%. Get it? All the Roadmap is saying re Social Security is, let’s give people the OPTION of exploring more efficient ways of investing while still guaranteeing the safety of those funds withheld for retirement! They’re going to confiscate the money anyway. The question is: who’s better at investing for retirement? The federal government (great track record there) or individuals? (And even then, the proposal states that under this voluntary plan, individuals would choose from “…a list of managed investment funds approved by the government for soundness and safety.”) Most people don’t remember all the sound and fury that erupted when 401ks were first introduced as an alternative to traditional company-run pension funds. Well, believe me, lots of people (like my Dad) have seen the pension funds they paid into for decades dwindle away to nothing.
If you haven’t read Ryan’s proposal, I seriously urge you to do so. It’s written in very easy to understand language. I honestly believe that if more people took the time to even skim through the Roadmap, they’d be demanding that it be instituted.

cynccook on August 22, 2010 at 9:15 PM

cynccook on August 22, 2010 at 9:15 PM

From my above post:

Social security is broke. It’s not a matter of if. It’s not a matter of when. It’s only a matter of how long the pols can keep lying to us about it.

And the pols include Paul Ryan.

gryphon202 on August 22, 2010 at 9:17 PM

I honestly believe that if more people took the time to even skim through the Roadmap, they’d be demanding that it be instituted.

cynccook on August 22, 2010 at 9:15 PM

cf. Contrast With America, ca. 1994

gryphon202 on August 22, 2010 at 9:19 PM

Whoops. I meant contract. Dang preview button. -.-

gryphon202 on August 22, 2010 at 9:20 PM

I miss Dick Armey in the US Congress. His uncompromising values are needed in this “it’s all about the economy and gov’t spending” blah, blah, blah. We need to hear more from him on multiple issues…

TBenton on August 22, 2010 at 9:20 PM

No offense, but Dick had a chance to put his politics where his mouth is when he was in Republican leadership, he bailed instead. It’s always easier to kibitz from the bleachers

+ 1,000,000

The CA-GOP seems to have developed cold feet over their
prospects of winning both Gov and Sen election .
Are they scared that they might actually win in CA ? Are they so unprepared for public support that they want to actively sabotage it when they see it coming ?
Why ???
Maybe someone in GOP will bother to explain what they have against SB 1070 that they don’t even want to discuss it AMONGST THEMSELVES
Wusses them all

also, + 1,000,000

Mutnodjmet on August 22, 2010 at 9:23 PM

LET’S GET REAL FOLKS….

Heres’ how the Paul Ryan plan will have a chance to get enacted……..The U.S. Economy completely collapses, with Super Majorities of the GOP in both houses and a Conservative in the White House (and only if the Progressive/Communist Left doesn’t find a judge that will declare it “unconstitutional”).

Until then this plan is just like the FLAT TAX idea…..headed to Nowheresville.

***and weren’t Dick Armey and Steve Forbes “leaders” that didn’t get very far in the GOP? They aren’t barnacles on the Tea Party movement are they?

I’m just asking, I don’t know a lot about their “Freedom Works” project.

PappyD61 on August 22, 2010 at 9:47 PM

we are doomed.

billy on August 22, 2010 at 4:38 PM

****and OBAMACARE IS NOT GOING TO BE REPEALED.

Truth be told the GOP (rotten full of RINO/Progressives too) has been taken over for the last 20 years by the Rockefeller wing/Progressives and they are NOT GOING TO GIVE UP THE PARTY to the Hillbilly from Wasilly or anyone else.

Bush 41 was the biggest disaster of the Presidency of Ronald Reagan, that one decision has left the GOP crippled and inspired talk of YET ANOTHER BUSH RUNNING FOR THE WHITE HOUSE IN 2012(Jebbie).

The GOP loves the power in D.C. and they know that they will be given the keys to power again and then they’ll just have more (care of their fellow Progressives in the Dem party). Most of the time it seems like politics in D.C. is all just a show. And we’re just the stupid ticket buyers.

PappyD61 on August 22, 2010 at 9:55 PM

AYE, another one of “those” threads in which I must opine.

Dick Army, a man I despised-until recently.

Old age; natural wisdom; grandchildren; mortality

Whatever the reason, he now seems to “get it”.

Paul Ryan’s mind is a national treasure, and like Paul Revere, he alone is running through the countryside carrying the weight of a nation, alerting the Patriots.

Browndog on August 22, 2010 at 11:09 PM

Lourdes on August 22, 2010 at 6:29 PM

You beat me to it. The Constitution isn’t ambiguous about that, and it takes nothing more than a simple read to realize that this “anchor baby” stuff was intended to go no further than the descendants of slaves and indentured servants in America. It was never intended to be a welcome mat for Mexican criminals, nor for any others that illegally enter the US, or illegally stay in the US beyond their legally permissible time.

14th Amendment, United States Constitution, Section 1:
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Children of illegals, such as Mexicans or others that enter the US unlawfully, or lawfully enter the country, but unlawfully stay beyond their welcome, are not American citizens, just by virtue of being born on American soil, due to the fact that their criminal parents are subject to another jurisdiction: the one from which they are absconding (be it Mexico, Canada, or wherever). The states were not free to make laws, rules or regulations infringing upon the freedoms and citizenships of those that were granted citizenship (the actually authorized anchor babies, or those born to slaves and indentured servants in the country, and freed by emancipation).

Idjits like:

DarkCurrent on August 22, 2010 at 6:40 PM

are free to kick, cry and piss about how I worded it, but they’re doing is obfuscating the point, which you did see. In any event, if they:

DarkCurrent on August 22, 2010 at 6:40 PM
JohnGalt23 on August 22, 2010 at 6:17 PM

…don’t like how I say things, they are more than free to pick which side of my ass to kiss. If they’re children enough to intentionally bog themselves down in language, choosing not to look at the intent, but to complain about how it was worded, then they’re not worth the non-paper their ‘replies’ were written on. To them, and everyone else that doesn’t care for the fact that I’m going to express my opinion the way I’m going to express my opinion: f*ck ‘em. You do it your way, and I’ll do it mine. As for invisible ink, the only thing written in that is the test result that states those two dumbasses have functioning brains. Now, since this site (stupidly) doesn’t have a utility that I can find that forwards replies to individual e-mail accounts, if they have anything to say to me, they can easily click on the link and do it. However, like most of the cowards, here, they prefer to do it, here, where it mightn’t be noticed unless you frequently check back. Going right to someone might result in an in-writing beatdown that most are too cowardly and buffoonish to face the possibility of.

Virus-X on August 22, 2010 at 11:20 PM

In a better world Paul Ryan would be regarded as a moderate squishy rather than as outside the mainstream of the GOP RINO herd. He is not extreme or radical, the GOP has drifted so far left that he just seems that way.

sharrukin on August 22, 2010 at 11:21 PM

I’m against his plan, because I am against the New Deal.

The ultimate irony here is that Paul Ryan’s plan is the only way to save the New Deal from implosion, and the Dems are resisting it.

He’s done their homework for them and given them a plan to save everything they love and hold dear on a silver platter, and yet they refuse.

It’s actually quite funny/sad if you think about it.

ebrawer on August 22, 2010 at 11:35 PM

sammypants on August 22, 2010 at 8:04 PM

It could be worse. I have Gwen “poop for power” Moore. I pray Dan Sebring could win but it is Milwaukee.

I may not agree with everything Paul Ryan does but he has a first rate mind and votes with what he thinks is best. Now Jim Sennsbrenner is a treasure.

Gracelynn on August 23, 2010 at 12:08 AM

Dick Armey to GOP: Why don’t you have the guts to grab the Third Rail? Committing mass political suicide isn’t courageous, it’s stupid.

year_of_the_dingo on August 22, 2010 at 5:07 PM

It is only the third rail because the GOP has allowed it to be, by not forcefully defending those that do against the leftists in the media and congress.

Slowburn on August 23, 2010 at 12:40 AM

I wish I was there with her…. :)
I would have said:

“with all due respect, governor, if the state of Michigan is an incubator for America, I have to break it to you that the patient has died.

It’s time to unplug the machine and perform the funeral, not go about bragging that Michigan has turned the corner like some kind of recovery summer.”

golfmann on August 22, 2010 at 6:53 PM

Bingo. She has failed her “experiment in the states” and then is going to lecture Republicans on how to save the country? What kind of nonsense is that?

29Victor on August 23, 2010 at 1:22 AM

Vince, in the Road Map, the changes only apply to those younger because the older people have planned their lives already with the present plan. If we go on the same path we’re on, we’re going to be broke for sure, so why not give it a try.

Yes, I have read the Road Map, and how do you “guarantee” the safety of these government-managed funds? I don’t trust the Congress! Two words: Fannie, Freddie…

PattyJ on August 23, 2010 at 1:41 AM

As a retired teacher, I sense that if the GOP were to be given a report card and every move they made graded, there’d be one heck of an uncommfortable parent / teacher conference coming soon. The GOP is the very reason Obama came into his destructive power. It can all be summarized in just one simple example -John McCain’s rejection of defining the difference between Obama,the left and the rest of America.

We didn’t get great and gain independence by failing to define what we believe and what needs to be done about it.Only the entrenched GOP as a permanent part of the ruling class doesn’t care about such things -except to mumble and whine prior to an election, that their lifestyls might not change.
The system folks is broken – it’s not so much the politicians that have failed America as it is the people who insist on returning such a virus to the seats of power. A citizenry who insist on taking money from others, codifying into law their corrupt immoral culture, avoiding uncomfortable but necessary action, like defending life, family and our nation’s sovereignity, and demanding to be lied to by their leaders -that they may feel good.

At the turn of the previous century, GK Chesterton predicted a coming era when man would seek to rule himself by feelings and no longer by rational moral principle.
We are here – “feeling” lousy as hell!

Don L on August 23, 2010 at 3:44 AM

From the start of this Tea Party movement, Dick Armey has become my favorite politician. Not only is he the most eloquent and focused on the right things but he also has the best name in politics!

Who among us isn’t a proud member of the Dick Army!

MJBrutus on August 23, 2010 at 6:23 AM

You cannot have a ‘third rail’ of politics when the power to that rail gets shut down because the national government goes bankrupt. Americans are coming to understand this concept.

One does not ‘invest’ in SSA: it is tax money that is spent and you are promised future funds from the next generation. You do not earn any increases in SSA, but only the promise of paying you a scant amount more than you paid to the federal government. The intergenerational ‘compact’ of SSA got broken during the Johnson Administration and any talk of a ‘lock box’ or ‘rate of return on investment’ is ignoring the fact that those funds put into the government have been spent: you cannot go anywhere to demand your money back as in any other investment. Instead we ask the young workers to pay for the older worker’s SSA, which is all fine and dandy if you have a demographics situation of the 1930′s with families of five, six or seven children as a relative norm, not 2.3 children and bare replacement level of population. You do not get to solvency by ‘raising’ the retirement age, but only push the question of when this will be settled and for how much debt upon our children.

That is both immoral and unethical when it is our problem we foist upon our children, who should not have our sins visited upon them. We have been lied to for decades about this topic, yet anyone who understood SSA’s first predicted going to the red in the 1980′s to happen about 2030 understood there would be no SSA for them when they got to any retirement age: our money was being spent not saved or invested. Telling the truth to Americans is strong political medicine, and yet we are a resilient people and will accept basic pocketbook economics and adjust to it. We cannot be held to the promises of past politicians in regard to retirement benefits, medical benefits, nor, indeed, any ‘benefits’ promised by the federal government done in our name as we did not sign our name up to them.

You will be attacked as ‘mean’ and ‘hating’ various groups, and yet the rejoinder that indenturing our children to pay for our promises made in their name is against the basic concept of being born without debt to your name and being a free individual in our Nation. Putting a debt price-tag on our children for them to pay off is horrific… it is the older and presumably wiser people of the Nation deciding to burden our children with debt they did not incur. That is why no Congress is beholden to the acts of a previous Congress. That is why each year spending is determined by Congress and revenue by the House. That includes each and every Department of the US government, every ‘benefit’, every ‘third rail’, every thing save the military which gets a review every two years as it is a bit harder to stand up a veteran force once you let all the veterans go from service.

State the facts as they are and the solutions begin to state themselves.
- For such promises in SSA for payback, allow everyone to take that amount off in their taxes until that ‘account’ is drawn to zero funds.

- For those already drawing funds they can continue to do so out of new revenue to the limit of their account… monthly, quarterly, annually or in one tax-free lump sum. Or they can go back to work and start using their write-off and sign out of the ‘payback’ portion of the system.

- End FICA.

- Add Medicare and Medicaid together, divide by 2, apportion by population to the States as block grants and draw that amount to zero over five years so the States can figure out if they can screw up the system less, per State, than the federal government already has… and let the States pick up the tab if they think they can.

This is the nice and easy path out of these problems.

Forcing our children to pay for our retirment is something we cannot and should not be doing as it foists our needs upon the young without their input into the matter. We got rid of slavery and made debt passing to our children illegal, save when our government does it out of the kindess of its heart to indenture our children’s working years to supporting our time in the sun during retirement.

You can explain the ‘third rail’ in its absolute terms without the lovely leftist weasel language and all will understand it, and I would think most would repudiate the concept of it when properly stated in easy to understand terms. Do you want your children to pay off your mortgage involuntarily? Do you want them to pay for your medical expenses involuntarily? Do you want them to pay for your retirement involuntarily? Do you want your children to take up your burdens without being to ask them if they want to do so, so that you can ignore your responsibilities and ‘feel good’ about ‘helping’ others at the cost to your children?

If anyone answers ‘yes’ to these, then ask them why they are against slavery or selling one’s children into servitude to pay off their debts. That is harsh but distinctly accurate when we say they must do so without their consent. You, the voting age American, are the responsible actors in the US politically. The politicians are to represent you. Why do we vote for politicians voting to burden our children with our debt to make us feel good in the short term… and destroy our Nation in the long term? Nasty ‘third rail’ you gots there… it kills you when you touch it and your children when you don’t. Too bad we can’t sacrifice our luxuries to ensure our children’s freedom and liberty. That is asking too much of us as adults, apparently.

Only you can change how you vote, and who you vote for.

Only you can say this is wrong and stop supporting those in any party that supports putting our children into debt for our pleasures and needs without asking them.

Only you can do this.

Not your neighbor, not your friends, no one else will do this for you… it is your responsibility. And if you don’t vote you deserve the damnation that will come to us all because you shirk thinking about your role in all of this. You do matter.

ajacksonian on August 23, 2010 at 6:47 AM

LOL + 1000 Thought I was the only one. Do you know that you can only email him via his Congressional office if you live in his district? LOL

cynccook on August 22, 2010 at 8:13 PM

That is typical of Congresscritters. However, there are ways around that, and somewhere in my ancient stack of stuff, I have proof that Ryan does answer mail from those who aren’t his constiuents (or at least I wasn’t a constiuent at the time).

steveegg on August 23, 2010 at 7:19 AM

***and weren’t Dick Armey and Steve Forbes “leaders” that didn’t get very far in the GOP? They aren’t barnacles on the Tea Party movement are they?

I’m just asking, I don’t know a lot about their “Freedom Works” project.

PappyD61 on August 22, 2010 at 9:47 PM

FreedomWorks came onto the Tea Party Movement bandwagon early. In fact, they were at the first DC Tea Party in February 2009 (where I met the Boss Emeritus).

steveegg on August 23, 2010 at 7:24 AM

Let’s play word association………when I say” roadmap”
you say “contract with America”……sounds way too much like
a Gingrich do over
justonevictory on August 22, 2010 at 7:04 PM

I agree. It sounds like a gimmick, and the public is jaded

How about calling it “a party platform”. Parties have been using the platforms to store phoney promises to demographic blocs, something to be ignored after the convention. Candidates do not have to scream ‘platform’. They simply have to consistently promise to uphold certain items which also happen to be in the platform. This helps define the party from within, instead of from the MSM.

A good politician cannot be stumped by questions concerning other parts of the platform. They simply make dogged re iterations about the part they run on – like saving Medicare

The GOP has to frame the argument about the imminent collapse of SS and Medicare and the ways to solve the problem in a way that does not scare current seniors
[...]
Surely, the GOP can hammer home the point that ObaMaoCare already adversely affects the health care of seniors enrolled in Medicare. O-care cuts out the choices for seniors who want to enroll in Medicare Advantage, for example. It also will decrease the number of health care providers willing to service an older population.
onlineanalyst on August 22, 2010 at 8:02 PM

Cutting Medicare Advantage, threatening the provider pool, even taking from Medicaid to fund stimulus which went porkulus projects – [voiceover reciting list of porkulus robbery while flashing images of ripped off seniors and pork projects] this is real outrage and strikes a hugely important voter bloc, the boomer-agers. Such communication is lauched out of facts, not slogans, and avoids the gimmick in a time the public has lost trust

entagor on August 23, 2010 at 7:36 AM

If anyone wants to run on saving Social Security, they should attack Obamacare as the straw whoch will break Social Security, the greatest robbery of a pension fund in history, that at the same time Social Secuity is plundered to pay for Obamacare, Medicare will also be diminished to fund Obamacare, all using money paid in for decades by seniors in full trust it would be for them in retirement

Anyone who runs simply on ‘Saving Social Security’ without connecting it to Obamacare will suffer the fate of the dead duck. ‘Saving Social Security’ has become a code for ‘Cutting Social Security’. That bird will not fly in these bad economic times

entagor on August 23, 2010 at 7:44 AM

Granholm is trying to horn in on Sarah’s hot librarian look. It’s a good effort, and an improvement, but she doesn’t have the chops for it no matter what Lorien says, and you know what he will say.

Jaibones on August 23, 2010 at 8:48 AM

Want to fix SS? Play the Race card.
Only 57% of Black males live to age 70.
81% of White females live to age 70. 44% to age 85.

SS is a Black man’s tax to pay for old White ladies.

Ouch.

barnone on August 23, 2010 at 9:57 AM

I watched this and Granholm is a blithering idiot.

roux on August 23, 2010 at 11:37 AM

I agree with Mr. Armey,
Paul Ryan is the path thru the mid terms. If Republicans think that people are just going to go vote for them because they’re mad at BO & the democRATS. They are wrong. I’m still waiting for what they’re plan is!!

mmcnamer1 on August 23, 2010 at 12:56 PM

Dick, why didn’t you have guts enough to push through the Flat Tax on which you originally ran on and after you were in a position of power for years?

michaelo on August 23, 2010 at 2:50 PM

Sorry. Can’t stand listening to the self acknowledged worst state for 8 years governor do her routine song and dance, the same as Gregory in his opening remarks, smearing a candidate’s tag line with the media’s own whole cloth lie repeated again as if “the record”.

maverick muse on August 23, 2010 at 5:06 PM

Was I confusing porkulus with the auto bailouts? All the unconstitutional profligate whorehouse government spending looks the same to me.

gryphon202 on August 22, 2010 at 8:56 PM

You were.

steveegg on August 23, 2010 at 5:09 PM

Rand Paul, NOT critical of civil rights laws.

That entire mud slinging campaign against him wasn’t simply taking one point he made out of context, but the media elaborating their own projected context, refusing to acknowledge that Rand Paul never said what they keep saying.

Listen to the entire tape, and his follow up rebuttal to the media hatchet job.

maverick muse on August 23, 2010 at 5:09 PM

And the government “smartly” put us into bankruptcy.

SMARTLY. Smartly. smartly. smartly

maverick muse on August 23, 2010 at 5:11 PM

The relevant part of the 14th Amendment is section 1:

“Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

I don’t see the words ‘crap’ or ‘babies’ in there.

I do see the words “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,…”

DarkCurrent on August 22, 2010 at 6:40 PM

You used another individual and his/her vocabulary or nomenclature as Straw Man instead of addressing, originally, the issues and intent of what was expressed by that individual.

The AUTHOR of the 14th Amendment was straightforward in his statements about what he’d written as applying to former slaves and children of former slaves — it was only in recent and Leftwing populated decades that the 14th was used to “melt into” “anyone born in the U.S.” as to receiving U.S. citizenship.

In other words, being “under the jurisdiction” is a second or additional term as to citizenship, not part of one term…

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

About that, the Left (you appear to have belief in that Leftwing “reinterpretation” or, rather, distortion of the 14th)…CONFUSES TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION (a policing concept) WITH POLITICAL JURISDICTION (a nationality concept).

The sentence is not written to be redundant.

In other, very simple words, “no jurisdiction, no citizen.”

Or, no citizenship to their children born here (in the U.S.) if they’re not a citizen themselves.

This issue has been pointed out so clearly here, there, everywhere, so many times as to be so easily understood by nearly anyone who is able, yet it is the Left who persists, since the years of Ted Kennedy’s monstrous communist-redo of the American Left’s mind via his ’60′s amoral-era perspectives, in misrepresenting what the 14th SAYS IN PRINT and WHAT IT’S INTENT WAS AND IS.

Lourdes on August 23, 2010 at 6:06 PM

I am listening more now than ever to the plain-talkers.The man protesting in the street against da mosque in measured thoughtful yet plain tones is most impressive to me. Now, Armey is plain talking the truth on the Meet the Press. In response he gets meaningless misleading progressive babble with ad nauseum “partnering,” for example. When I hear this snooty liberal boilerplate kabuki I know the lie. That Granholm lady is snooty to the very expression on her face. You wonder how anyone could vote for a tool like her. Yeah, republicans need to grow a pair. Right!

Where are most of the republicans?
Under the pickle.

More red meat, please!

Sherman1864 on August 23, 2010 at 7:11 PM

This issue has been pointed out so clearly here, there, everywhere, so many times as to be so easily understood by nearly anyone who is able, yet it is the Left who persists, since the years of Ted Kennedy’s monstrous communist-redo of the American Left’s mind via his ’60’s amoral-era perspectives, in misrepresenting what the 14th SAYS IN PRINT and WHAT IT’S INTENT WAS AND IS.

Lourdes on August 23, 2010 at 6:06 PM

The idea of being born here AND being subject to jurisdiction would mean that the two are not mutually exclusive. It implies by its very wording that someone could be born here, and yet NOT subject to our political jurisdiction.

I think that to say that everyone born here IS automatically subject to our jurisdiction requires a rather tortured twisting of plain wording.

gryphon202 on August 23, 2010 at 9:17 PM

Comment pages: 1 2