A common failing among political activists is the inability to see political decisions and situations from the point of view of those they may disagree with. Activists are by their nature ideological rather than pragmatic and frequently the decisions made by political leaders who have moved beyond their activist roots are made based on considerations which are purely practical and are based on only a very loose understanding of what will really satisfy the activists who make up the various grassroots constituencies they are trying to appeal to.
So if you're a highly motivated Liberty Republican, a Ron Paul supporter or an ideological libertarian working within the Republican party, I'm going to ask you to try to think outside the box for a little while here while looking at the selection of Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney's vice presidential running mate.
From our liberty activist perspective Paul Ryan is pretty much just another establishment Republican hack. With 7 terms under his belt he's been in office too long. His voting record is utterly uninspiring and shows no real sign of acting on fiscally conservative principles. He's a big military supporter and never saw a domestic security clampdown or foreign military adventure he didn't like. Plus he's about as hardcore a religious conservative as you can find in office. Despite all these indisputable facts, I'm going to suggest that Paul Ryan is still a major concession to the liberty movement within the Republican Party.
Remember that the party establishment is not ideological. All they care about is getting things done, particularly getting their party in power and being able to satisfy the constituencies which keep them in office year after year. They are not inherenly hostile to the best interests of the country or to ideological principles, but they are more loyal to those who provide the enormous amounts of money it takes to get elected or who can provide them with blocks of reliable votes in their home districts. They are made very nervous by any politician who seems too ideological and whose decisions are likely to be unpredictable and deviate from the general strategy of maintaining power and avoiding change.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Gregg
Mitt and Ryan loves the TSA, bailouts, Obamacare and illegals. Ron Paul is the only candidate with a plan to end the TSA and end the endless wars for Israel, it all started a decade ago after a false flag attack. 9/11, US and Israel.
2 - SHTF-Gear
Sorry, I don't like the 'don't want to offend grandma for gift socks' analogy.
They are elected officials, by us, for us.
Sorry if they don't/won't 'understand' why we are loudly voicing our discontent, but that will leave room for MORE liberty candidates to step forward and run against these clueless, placating incumbents.
Paul Ryan voted for the Patriot Act, NDAA, (initially) SOPA, TARP, Bailouts, extending Medicare, further Federal involvement in Public Education, etc. etc. etc.
To even ~think~ this guy is 'libertarian leaning' is a joke and an insult.
3 - Bob Vondruska
Paul Ryan is definitely not a radical, and if he is, that must make Ron Paul a super radical. The problem is that the idiots in the media who label Paul Ryan's budget plan as "radical" have no clue as to what the word means. Paul Ryan's budget plan can actually be called weak and ineffective. It doesn't cut spending, would add $4 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years, and would take 30 years to actually balance the budget. What is so radical about that?
Ron Paul's budget plan on the other hand would cut $1 trillion in just the first year alone, end wasteful overseas spending, dismantle 5 federal departments, and would balance the budget in only 3 years. When you compare these two plans, the only thing that is radical is the difference between these two plans. Paul Ryan is just another Yes man with a watered-down do-nothing plan that will take his running mate (Romney) to the bottom of the toilet bowl. It is the exact same type of pairing like they had in 1996, when the uncharismatic Bob Dole chose Jack Kemp as his running mate and had his ass handed to him on a platter by the incumbent Bill Clinton. Unless the RNC wakes up and puts Ron Paul's name into nomination, it will be a repeat of 1996. Romney is a joke, and so is his hand picked puppet Paul Ryan.
It's either Ron Paul or 4 more years of Obama!!
4 - KittenJuggler
I don't wish my grandma would die and leave me money. I do wish the RNC dies. The difference is that my grandma loves me and is senile. The RNC wants to trick me and I'm not a simpleton like they obviously think. Paul Ryan is Romney with bad hair. That's not radical, it's just fashion averse.
5 - Glenn Contrarian
Dave -
Are you actually trying to be empathetic with the Republican leadership in this article? Interesting.
That said, if one looks back in the days of the the Bush era when the Republicans controlled both houses, Paul Ryan's voting record shows he's anything but fiscally conservative. Furthermore, concerning Paul Ryan's Medicare plan, you said:
But from an establishment perspective it's absolutely revolutionary because doing anything except voting for more spending and more pandering is absolutely radical.
But here's the big problem that nobody on either side is talking about with Ryan's Medicare plan. Dave, I now run an Adult Family Home - I take care of old people - and I can tell you that not that many people in their late seventies and above would be able to go out to the marketplace - much less go online - to shop for a health care plan. What's worse, if they leave it up to their not-so-young kids, or just as likely, their 'trusted' caregivers (especially if they never had children), their children or their caregiver will be strongly tempted to get the cheapest plan available just so they can get their hands on that refund check from the government allowed under the Ryan plan for getting a plan less expensive than the second-cheapest plan out there.
Old people don't want to have to go shopping for insurance, Dave, whether online or on mortar-and-brick stores (or - horrors! - the insurance salesman knocking on their doors). This opens our elderly up to yet another level of abuse. It is a truly bad idea.
6 - FreedomNow
I think you are absolutely correct and thank you for this.
7 - Les Slater
The ruling class IS pragmatic. They sometimes dangle a Ron Paul or a Dennis Kucinich as some cheap glitter or a bad joke.
To even begin to take any of these candidates seriously is sad.
8 - Igor
@5-Glenn: you are exactly right. Insurance swindlers just want to victimize people under duress to whom they can sell policies that sound good but which have escape clauses for them and their companies.
The only way to get rid of the opportunism is with Single Payer UHC.
9 - Clav
And the government, of course, is never opportunistic...
Bwahahahaha!
10 - Clav
As Medicare's single payer, the government is currently being ripped off to the tune of $6B a year -- $2B right here in Miami alone.
Yeah, that's the way to reduce health care costs: let the government handle it; maybe we could turn it over to USPS management.
11 - Baronius
Good article.
12 - Glenn Contrarian
Clavos -
I just lost my whole reply to #10, but I'll try to summarize it. $6B/year is a lot, right? But compared to the $551B/year that is Medicare, that fraud comes to a little over one percent. Big Whoop. Even added to the 1-2% (or 6-8%) of admin costs under Medicare, that's STILL lower than the admin costs of private health insurers and that's assuming that those private health insurers have zero fraud within their companies.
And if you go digging for "proof" that Medicare's admin costs are much higher, try reading this apples to apples comparison first.
And by the way, who perpetrates much of that Medicare fraud? The PRIVATE health insurance industry. Just ask Florida's Republican governor Rick Scott:
In 1997, Rick Scott was implicated in the biggest Medicare fraud case in US history, stepping down as CEO of Columbia/HCA after the hospital giant was fined $1.7 billion and found guilty of swindling the government. As Florida's new governor, Scott is now trying to kill off an anti-fraud database that would track the fraudulent distribution of addictive prescription drugs in Florida, over the protestations of law enforcement officials, Republican state lawmakers, and federal drug policy officials.
Saying that the private health insurance industry is so much better than Medicare is much like saying that the robbers are much better than the cops.
13 - Clav
Haw!! You provide Paul Krugman as your refutation?? Krugman is a Democrat and a Keynesian; reasons enough to disbelieve anything he says about economics.
To quote his own ending:
You should always remember:
1. Don’t believe anything Krugman says.
2. If you find what Krugman is saying plausible, remember rule 1.
14 - Les Slater
Krugman is an idiot stooge of the Democratic Party.
15 - Clav
And by the way, who perpetrates much of that Medicare fraud? The PRIVATE health insurance industry
Actually, no. According to the FBI, most of it is perpetrated by Medicare's equipment suppliers, particularly those dealing in DME (Durable Medical Equipment -- beds, wheelchairs, prosthetics, etc.), and I found that to be absolutely true while caring for my dying wife -- virtually everything supplied by Medicare's "preferred" contractors was overpriced and I could have bought myself at considerably lower prices. Her wheelchair, for example, could have been bought (online, by me) directly from the manufacturer at half the price paid to the "supplier" (read: middleman). When I called Medicare and suggested this, I was rebuffed and dismissed with a curt admonition that "We only buy from approved suppliers."
Scamming is rampant. You may poo-poo the fraud as " a little over one percent. Big Whoop," but the bottom line is, paraphrasing Everett Dirksen, "A billion here and a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money."
16 - Igor
Where can I read about that $6billion ripoff you talk about, Clav?
The USPS has been making profits for years, but the Bush congress in 2006 passed a law that forces USPS to pre-fund 75 years of employee benefits with 10 years, which has forced all their profits into pre-funding.
Is there even ONE corporation in America that could survive such a pre-funding requirement? Indeed, is there a corporation that can survive ANY pre-funding requirement?
All the corps I know about plan to pay all future benefits with future revenue (although they usually keep a small slush fund, which they have the right to raid for higher corporate needs, like big bonuses to execs).
How does the corp YOU work for do it? Do they pre-fund? Do you even have the courage to ask? I remember asking that very question when I was young and foolish and my reward was to be stifled for years.
17 - Igor
Clav has never read a word written by JM Keynes yet considers himself fit to condemn the man and his ideas.
18 - Baronius
Igor, I don't recall Clavos ever mentioning Keynes. He's rejected Keynesians, and I'm pretty sure we both agree that people who call themselves Keynesians these days have little to do with Keynes or his writings.
19 - Les Slater
Private insurance is a fraud too. I have private prescription insurance coverage that I pay for.
One example of ripoff is I have a statin, specifically pravastatin, prescribed by my primary care physician. I have paid a $12 co-pay for a 90 day supply. A notice says that retail price is $167.99 and that my insurance saved me $155.99. But if I actually do buy retail, the price, without any insurance, is $10. The $167.99 is a totally fictitious number and the insurance I pay for actually would save me a minus $2.
20 - Glenn Contrarian
Clavos -
Yet again, instead of reading the message, you reject it because of who the messenger is. That, sir, is why you're unable to see both sides of the story - because you will only listen to those who say what you want to hear.
Enjoy your Governor Scott, the one who was running a health insurance company that was ripping off Medicare - and the American taxpayer - while all the time saying how bad Medicare is.
21 - Clav
How does the corp YOU work for do it?
I am my own (Subchapter S) corp, and I don't provide myself any benefits (But I am forced to pay into Social Security).
22 - Clav
One example of ripoff is I have a statin, specifically pravastatin, prescribed by my primary care physician. I have paid a $12 co-pay for a 90 day supply. A notice says that retail price is $167.99 and that my insurance saved me $155.99. But if I actually do buy retail, the price, without any insurance, is $10. The $167.99 is a totally fictitious number and the insurance I pay for actually would save me a minus $2.
I've encountered the same thing, Les. I've also paid as much as $150 at retail for meds I pay a $5 co-pay for when buying with insurance. Usually, I suspect the pharmacy of screwing up, rather than the insurance co., but you could be right -- or maybe we both are...
23 - Clav
Clav has never read a word written by JM Keynes
Igor, I took two years (four semesters) of economics, both micro and macro, in college, so stuff your innuendo.
24 - Igor
@19-Les: this kind of cost-kiting has been reported to me by many people. It makes it look like the InsCo is doing a better job than they really are.
25 - Igor
@18-Baronius: I don't know anyone who calls themselves a "Keynesian", do you? Would you refer to a physicist who uses "F = g((m1*m2)/R**2) as a "Newtonian"?