Gyroscopic Investing

Greenwich, Conn. PAUL D. RYAN is the most articulate and intellectually imposing Republican of the moment, but that doesn’t alter the fact that this earnest congressman from Wisconsin is preaching the same empty conservative sermon.

Thirty years of Republican apostasy — a once grand party’s embrace of the welfare state, the warfare state and the Wall Street-coddling bailout state — have crippled the engines of capitalism and buried us in debt. 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 professes to be a defense hawk, though the true conservatives of modern times — Calvin Coolidge, Herbert C. Hoover, Robert A. Taft, Dwight D. Eisenhower, even Gerald R. Ford — would have had no use for the neoconconservative imperialism that the G.O.P. cobbled from policy salons run by Irving Kristol’s ex-Trotskyites three decades ago. These doctrines now saddle our bankrupt nation with a roughly $775 billion “defense”? budget in a world where we have no advanced industrial state enemies and have been fired (appropriately) as the global policeman.

Benko wrote: Then you should be glad that Ryan is not the one running for president, and that Romney will be the one deciding on the exact details of the budget plan that will be proposed. 

I'm sure it will compare favorably to the budget plan passed by the current administration :-)  Oh wait....

Reub wrote: How can you say that they're identical when one has been President and failed and the other hasn't?

Reub wrote: How can you say that they're identical when one has been President and failed and the other hasn't?

Ad Orientem wrote:

Reub wrote: How can you say that they're identical when one has been President and failed and the other hasn't?

Because both have track records that make it clear they are ideological twins. There may be some differences on details. But philosophically there isn't much difference. Romney and Obama are both crony capitalist, neo-imperialists who favor big government statism and are perfectly willing to bankrupt the country.

Ad Orientem wrote: Yep. Anyone got any recommendations for good movie rentals? I'm going to need some for election night since I
don't see myself voting this year.

hoost wrote: Would anyone consider a vote for Gary Johnson?  He's running on the Libertarian Party ticket.  What I've read of him, I like, although I haven't done an in-depth analysis.  I don't have any delusions he'll win, but some votes for him could help to make a statement, at least, that some of us are not happy with the way things are. 

hoost wrote: Would anyone consider a vote for Gary Johnson?  He's running on the Libertarian Party ticket.  What I've read of him, I like, although I haven't done an in-depth analysis.  I don't have any delusions he'll win, but some votes for him could help to make a statement, at least, that some of us are not happy with the way things are. 

hoost wrote: I don't think I'll be voting for the other two.  At some point, I feel you have to take a stand.  A vote for either Obama or Romney is a vote for the status quo, IMHO.

MediumTex wrote: I figured I would just write-in Ron Paul again like I did in 2008.

Simonjester wrote:

Pointedstick wrote:

hoost wrote: Would anyone consider a vote for Gary Johnson? He's running on the Libertarian Party ticket. What I've read of him, I like, although I haven't done an in-depth analysis. I don't have any delusions he'll win, but some votes for him could help to make a statement, at least, that some of us are not happy with the way things are.

I'm probably going to vote for him. Living in California makes voting easy since regardless of who you choose, the slimy corrupt Democrats always win anyway.

true

MediumTex wrote: I figured I would just write-in Ron Paul again like I did in 2008.

MangoMan wrote:

Pointedstick wrote: Illinois? Nah. That's the big O's home state! I'm from there and I can tell you that Illinois is probably the dirtiest place of them all. It'll always be a blue state even if they have to start registering dogs and cats to vote.

true, dat
sweet home Chicago

Pointedstick wrote: Illinois? Nah. That's the big O's home state! I'm from there and I can tell you that Illinois is probably the dirtiest place of them all. It'll always be a blue state even if they have to start registering dogs and cats to vote. Same for New Jersey, really. Wisconsin, Colorado, Pennsylvania, and Nevada all look pretty blue to me too.