Wednesday, August 17, 2011

Paul Ryan for President 2012?

We interrupt this regularly scheduled column for something possibly much more interesting. According to the Weekly Standard and the vastly-overrated Karl Rove, there MAY be exciting news afoot. Paul Ryan is considering jumping into the field of GOP contenders to replace Obama in 2012.

According to the report:

“Wisconsin congressman Paul Ryan is strongly considering a run for president. Ryan, who has been quietly meeting with political strategists to discuss a bid over the past three months, is on vacation in Colorado discussing a prospective run with his family. Ryan’s concerns about the effects of a presidential campaign – and perhaps a presidency – on his family have been his primary focus as he thinks through his political future.”
Wow! Ryan originally said he wouldn’t run three months ago, but according to a source close to Ryan, “He’s coming around.” Apparently, Ryan chose not to run when it looked like Mitch Daniels would run. When Daniels opted not to run, Ryan began to change his mind. Also, apparently, he (correctly) believes that none of the current candidates are talking seriously about economics.

So what hurdles does he face?

Well, he already has strong name recognition within the party, that’s vital. Moreover, he has a strong following among fiscal conservatives. Indeed, no one else in the race can claim anything similar to the reputation he has among fiscal conservatives, who would likely flock to him. Whether this would include Tea Party supporters I cannot say as Ryan does not strike me as having openly courted the Tea Party. But he shares their principles better than any of the other candidates.

Ryan also has strong connections to religious conservatives, who have yet to pick a candidate. Bachmann, Perry, and Pawlenty all made appeals to those voters, but so far they seem to be a group without a home.

Ryan gets a lot of love from conservative talking heads as well.

That’s a pretty strong base for a Republican Primary contender. His immediate competitors would be Perry and Bachmann. But both of those have flaws he doesn’t. Perry seems to trouble people for reasons they can’t articulate and Bachmann has serious organizational problems and keeps putting her foot in her mouth. Ryan isn’t as inflammatory as Bachmann or as accomplished a glad-hander as Perry, but he brings with him an earnestness that seems to work.

The biggest hurdle he faces, according to conventional wisdom, is that this is late in the game to start raising money. But is that really a concern? Probably not. Most of the candidates have been bringing in around four to five million dollars per quarter, with Romney bringing in around three times that. Perry too is prepared to bring in Romney-like numbers. But the vast majority of large donors have so far refused to commit themselves. Thus, there are literally hundreds of millions of dollars sitting on the sidelines waiting. Ryan could tap into that fairly easily given his support among both fiscal conservatives and the conservative intelligentsia. That would make him a match for Romney/Perry.

What about waiting this long? Well, Perry just jumped into the race this weekend and probably became the presumptive frontrunner or runner-up in the process. There’s no reason to think another week or two would be fatal to Ryan, as support clearly hasn’t solidified around any candidate or candidates at this point.

Also, let us not forget that Bill Clinton didn’t jump in for the 1992 race until October against a similarly uninteresting field. Indeed, the media dubbed them the Seven Dwarves at the time.

Just as interestingly, most conservative heavyweights have been waiting to give their endorsements. For example, Iowa heavyweight Rep. Steve King was expected to endorse either Pawlenty or Bachmann (with whom he is a personal friend). With Pawlenty gone, it seemed obvious he would endorse Bachmann. . . but he hasn’t. This is pure speculation, but he could be waiting for Ryan to make up his mind. Or he could just be waiting to see how things go. Indeed, according to numerous recent reports, very few heavyweights have agreed to endorse anyone at this point.

So between (1) the lack of a true frontrunner or frontrunners, (2) the lack of commitment by the money men, and (3) the lack of commitment by the heavyweight endorsers, the field essentially remains open at this point. Thus, being late should not hurt Ryan.

Finally, the million dollar question is this: given that Republicans are telling pollsters they want a candidate who can win more than anything else, how would Ryan do against Obama? Ryan crushes Obama. On the one hand, I think almost any Republican can beat Obama. But even beyond the public’s desire just to see an end to Obama’s reign of error, Ryan has shown himself to be more than a match in verbal debates with Obama and he has shown himself to be a talented, honest speaker of great skill, as well as a great thinker on economic issues. TOTUS is simply outclassed by the Wisconsin kid.

And while the Democrats think they have spotted a weakness because he proposed privatizing part of Medicare (an issue they used in an upstate New York House race), that is unlikely to be a problem. Ryan largely kept his nose clean during the brutal debt ceiling debate and Obama himself tossed entitlement reform on the table since that time.

What do you think? Good? Bad? Who’s Ryan?

I’ll do a contender profile on him next week.


Joel Farnham said...

This is the first guy that you have profiled that is interesting. The rest have serious baggage to work around. I am talking about Perry. I would have held my nose, but the thought of getting another Bush type conservative who thinks that executive orders are the way to go makes me nauseous.

I wonder if he has the wherewithal to compete. I am talking about the money. As you say, the serious money is still sitting on the sidelines.

He has the gifts of rhetoric and intellectual bona fides necessary for the job. His experience as top guy might be lacking.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, I just read about this yesterday. I'm not sure how much stock I put in these reports just yet, but if he decided to run for the presidency after all, I would be on his team in a heartbeat. As you (and Bev) pointed out earlier, it would be far better, in my opinion, to have someone who's shown Tea Party affiliation through his actions rather than someone who's just tried to claim their leadership.

The lack of seriousness among the present candidates about the major economic issues is another consideration. There's also this: the Democrats are likely going to try to hang entitlement cuts around our necks in the election--specifically, Ryan's evil and horrible plan. In that case, wouldn't it make sense to have the guy who came up with it to explain it, especially since he appears to be the only one able to do so?

The only downsides I see are 1) People like Ryan are badly needed in the House to lead the fight on entitlement reform and fiscal policy, and 2) He lacks executive experience. But, the last one's not so bad in his case, I think, because he's been tackling such major issues. I think we could waive that for him.

Joel Farnham said...


I don't see that Ryan is such a loss for the House. This next election season is not as critical in the House as 2010. It is more important for the Senators.

I think it is more his lack of experience as an executive that might do him in if he was the President. Another way of putting it, he has the ear marks, but does he have the strength of character necessary for the coming years? I think he does. I also think he has the ability, oh so rare, of keeping his mouth shut when necessary. I never thought this was that important until Obama and Biden and Palin came along.

Think about it for a moment. It must have been a bitter pill to swallow that his Plan didn't get passed. Yet, we aren't inundated with him complaining about his plan not passing. That too could change, but it is a welcome relief, isn't it?

Unknown said...

Andrew: This is the first exciting potential entry that I've seen. I hope he decides to run. We've discussed many times on this blog that all other issues pale in comparison to the issue of the economy. This is a guy who can come up with a plan, explain it, defend it, and shove it down Obama's throat. I look forward to your profile. If he doesn't have any baggage that we haven't heard about yet, he could break the primaries wide open.

rlaWTX said...

I got a little tingly when I read this headline... I don't know a lot about him beyond the Plan, but he seems serious but not boring.

I look forward to your profile... Trying to not get my hopes up...

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, This is the first one to really excite me. I like a lot of what I saw with Pawlenty, but he never "excited me." And some of the rest I liked more in theory than practice. And Perry troubles me. I am troubled when I asked people from Texas if they like him and I keep hearing "oh yeah, he's great... but you don't want him in Washington." Hmm.

I will profile Ryan next week, but right now I definitely hope he jumps in because as far as I've seen so far, he's the kind of guy who we need at a time like this.

T-Rav said...

Joel, I wasn't thinking about elections so much as what the GOP does with them--see also the wrangling of the past six months. I think Ryan has been critical not only as an idea man but also as a bridge between the leadership and the Tea Party base, a real mover-and-shaker behind the scenes. If Boehner hadn't had the assistance of Ryan and others like him, these battles over the budget and the debt ceiling could have turned out very different. That's why I'd be reluctant to see him leave the House just yet; but if he can do more good for the country in the Oval Office, then that's that.

I basically agree with you on the question of executive experience. He hasn't really had any, but he has shown several of the necessary leadership qualities. And in a way, that negotiating-solutions-and-working-with-others thing I just mentioned is a lot of what an executive has to do, so maybe we could say he's had a little informal experience.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, You make a good point about executive experience. I definitely prefer it. Keeping in mind that I haven't profiled him yet, I think he might arguably have a decent substitute through his leadership and committee leadership positions. I'm not sure.... and I do honestly prefer actual executives, but it may be an effective substitute.

I agree too that we need a guy like this in the House, BUT keep in mind that he would be submitting the initial budget to Congress -- the President always does these days. So he could actually have the power to set the tone before Congress even takes a crack at it. That might be an advantage?

On the Tea Party thing, I agree. I am a firm believer in the old axioms of "follow the money" or "look for actions rather than words." I don't recall Ryan flirting with the Tea Party, but he has definitely been pushing their principles. Some of the others who are screaming about their Tea Party credentials, on the other hand, have done nothing in that regard or actually went the other way.

Consider for example, Perry's claim to turn down stimulus money, when he actually took billion of it the year before turning down millions. Or Santorum's claim to be the original Tea Party candidate when I'm not even sure he could find a meeting.

On Medicare, I agree, Ryan is the best guy to explain it because he came up with it. So rather than having unserious candidate X trying to talk their way around it, you've got the guy who "gets it" defending it. I think that's good. Plus, he's got a real command of the numbers and when people learn "the program will be broke in XX years," then they might wake up to the need for change.

AndrewPrice said...

P.S. As for putting credence in these reports, that is the problem. But this is now being widely reported and I hope the fact that his own people are no longer shooting down the idea and that his friends are leaking this mean that he is serious.

It would be disappointing if he doesn't run.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, That's an excellent point and I think really distinguishes him from so many others. He's not out there shooting off his mouth and playing around. He comes across as very serious and very earnest. I think the country can use that after the light-weight and the clown we have in the White House right now.

On the executive experience, that is the question. That's the reason legislators rarely make good Presidents, because it's a different kind of experience. What does give me some comfort on that though is that he has made it to the leadership (and at a very young age), and he strikes me as a guy who is a quick study of what he does, i.e. he's not going to do this seat-of-the-pants style.

T-Rav said...

Speaking of Perry, for whatever it's worth, one Texan who has voted for him and overall supports him has drawn up a list of criticisms people are making about the governor:

Most of them are stupid (Texas executes too many people, Perry's gay, blah blah blah), but a couple are rather troubling, such as the Gardasil controversy, his support of in-state tuition for illegals, and his position on stimulus money. Most of these negatives can be qualified in some way, though.

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, I agree. Ryan actually excites me, which is funny because he's just not an exciting guy. But he strikes me as "the grown up's candidate." LOL!

On the economics issue, I actually think he would be the first one in the race to actually talk genuinely about economics. I think Pawlenty had some good ideas, Cain had some interesting ones, and Romney's had some horrible ones... but the rest don't seem to be talking about it at all.

And even beyond economics, I get a sense that Ryan's principles are solid. I know he's a social conservative, but he doesn't seem obsessed with it. I can't see him favor a weak foreign policy, isolationism, or disarmament.

I guess well see. Let's hope he runs!

Unknown said...

Although he may not have top-level executive credentials, he does have a personal business background, having worked as a manager in his family's earth-moving business. And we can even have a little fun. One of his first jobs was driving an Oscar Mayer weinermobile. That means that at 20, he already had done more meaningful work than Barack Obama has done to date.

AndrewPrice said...

rlaWTX, Same here. I've been really impressed with his budget, with how he took Obama down on Obamacare and the response to the state of the union he gave. I don't know everything about him yet, but what I do know I've liked. And I hope he doesn't back out on us. It would be very disappointing.

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, LOL! He blows Obama away in the experience department if he had any job! ;-)

I didn't know that he managed his family company, but that's a good sign. Unless it's a very small family firm, then he will be familiar with a lot of the skills it takes to be an executive.

And the weeinermobile is a huge plus!

Unknown said...

Andrew: Social conservatism is a plus if it's not doctrinaire and the be-all end-all of a candidate's existence (like Santorum's). Paul is a practicing Catholic, and seems to share the view that certain things such as abortion and homosexuality are sins, but he isn't planning on burning anybody at the stake for it. He has expressed his view a few times on the necessity of the separation of church and state, but doesn't believe that means that God has to be removed entirely from the public forum. I'd probably call that a moderate social view with a preference for tradition. This probably won't sit well with NARAL and the gay marriage lobby, but who the hell cares? They'll never support a Republican anyway.

Besides, in the immortal words of Bill Clinton, "it's the economy, stupid." If he can convince the American people that he has a workable solution to our economic fiasco, it wouldn't matter if he worships Baal.

T-Rav said...

Um, LawHawk, not to denigrate your point, but my cat has done more meaningful work than Obama has, and all it does is eat, sleep, and poop on our floor. So that doesn't necessarily mean anything.

Unknown said...

T-Rav: I don't mind you denigrating my point as long as you don't denigrate my cat (remember, Kitty Kelly is watching us very closely).

Writer X said...

And what better time to jump into the race as Obama is photographed slurping on an ice cream cone and pushing off that all-important jobs plan until after his millionth vacation.

The GOP field got seriously interesting this week.

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, I agree. I think first and foremost, it's the economy. Nothing else matters if the country falls apart economically, because that would eventually lead to socialism.

Secondly, I am perfectly happy with a social conservative who isn't doctrinaire in the sense that they (1) aren't obsessed with the issue and (2) aren't ignoring what they believe but also aren't under the impression the US should be a theocracy. From what I've seen of Ryan, he strikes the right balance: he has solid values and will work toward those, but isn't looking to ignore the Constitution or send Federal police into the bedroom to make sure that everyone else is living according to his specific beliefs. Compare that with someone like Santorum who can't answer a question about taxes without talking about gays and abortion. That's obsessive.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, That's unproven... that Obama poops on the floor. Oh, you meant your cat. Sorry, my mistake.

AndrewPrice said...

Writer X, Things definitely got more interesting this week. Let's hope Ryan does jump in!

I didn't see the picture, but he certainly seems to get photoed eating ice cream a lot! So much for healthy living?!

T-Rav said...

Andrew, I'm sure Obama would be very incensed if he heard you making such remarks about him. He's no doubt sick and tired by now of covering up for Biden.

TJ said...

Wow! This is great news if it's true. I really hope he runs and I would love to watch him mop the floor with Obambi in a debate!

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, Now that I think about it, this could be the first time in history that the White House is occupied by two people who possibly aren't house trained? That's a scary thought.

AndrewPrice said...

TJ, I think the debates would be incredible. Obama would look like a blithering idiot unless the MSM dumbed the questions down to "who is your favor President."

I hope this is true as well. This could be very exciting!

Ed said...

Andrew, I heard this mentioned on Rush too. I hope he runs! He would be my first choice!

AndrewPrice said...

Ed, Glad to hear word is spreading, maybe that will help convince him.

AndrewPrice said...

Here's a nice new scandal for you. It looks like Obama's bus... Carjack One.... was made in Canada.

What an ass!

What's worse, we taxpayers paid for that!

T-Rav said...

Hmmmmm....According to the Weekly Standard, Ryan has been encouraged by multiple high-level figures to make a presidential bid, including Jeb Bush, Rep. Jim Jordan (hard-liner in the debt battle), radio host Bill Bennett, Gov. Mitch Daniels, and most interestingly for me, John Boehner. He also said in an interview with a Milwaukee radio station last week that he was highly dissatisfied with the current crop of candidates. This sounds to me like a guy who's feeling called to run.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, That is interesting. I hope they manage to convince him. If I knew where he was in Colorado, I'd go hang out here with a checkbook and a big sign saying "Run Ryan Run!"

rlaWTX said...

T-Rav has a cat??????

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

I sure hope Ryan runs! BTW, Ryan was the main hero in most of Tom Clancy's novels. :^)

Looking forward to your post about him, Andrew.

I heard the same thing about Perry from my Texas friends, although they like him more than Romney or the other frontrunning candidates.

I do think Perry gets a bad rap irt the HPV immunization requirement.
I mean, it's been proven to be safe and prevent cancer so what's the problem?

Most parents want their kids immunized for measles, mumps, rubella, etc..

I don't know what's more troubling, that so many conservatives are angry that Perry signed an executive order to make that immunization a requirement (like manty other immunizations) or that Perry has reversed himself and called it a mistake.

I think Perry's biggest problem is that, like Clkinton he's poll driven, or, to be more fair he's conservative poll driven on a lot of issues.

Some might say he's just listening and learning and if it was a few things I could let it slide, but it's happened a lot and it concerns me and shows a detriment of leadership and first principles.

Although, if Ryan doesn't run I'll probably vote for Perry.
He has done well with the economy in Texas and the results more than make up for his shortcomings.

I really hope Ryan runs but I'll understand if he doesn't.
Sadly, the left wing media will savagely brutalize his family, as we saw with Palin.

I'm sure Ryan can take the heat but it's not a minor thing to know these jackals in the press will be targetting your family.

If Ryan runs he will need all the support we can muster. Not just money and time but countering the dastardly press and donks who are morally deficient.

BTW, "reign of error..." hilarious!
Gotta run. I have a dental appointment but I'll be back (so be forewarned). :^)

AndrewPrice said...

rlaWTX, Wait a minute!! Great point! I missed that. Hmmm. So our kitten assassin owns a cat?

AndrewPrice said...

USS Ben, If it's that Ryan, i.e. Clancy Ryan, then it would depend on who played him! LOL!

I agree about the immunization issue. I have little patience for the anti-vaccination voodoo crowd. And it troubles me that he caved in on a conspiracy theory issue.

But what troubles me most with Perry is this sense that he's ready to do the bidding of his donors. He has a serious George Bush Jr. feel to him, though he uses Bachmann-like rhetoric. And I'm concerned that he will end up being just another Big Business Trojan Horse.

He's probably still the best choice though of what's in the field right now, but he doesn't make me comfortable.

Reign of Error seems to describe Obama's presidency doesn't it?

T-Rav said...

Personally, I don't know what to think about Perry. He seems solid on most issues, and most of his negatives can be at least partly explained away. But he doesn't give me that "fire in the belly" impression other candidates or potential candidates, like Bachmann, do. That's a rather subjective and unimportant reason, I know, but there you go. I'd be thrilled if he becomes the nominee and beats Obama, but he just doesn't excite me. A Ryan that excites me.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I would be thrilled if any of these people beat Obama. Heck, even Paul might be fun for the 2-3 weeks he'd be president before they impeached him. But I think this an historic opportunity to shift the country to the right and set its direction in stone for generations to come. I'd like someone I trust to do that in office.

And with Perry, he may be that guy, I just don't know. But it's the "I don't know" part that makes me nervous about him. I could easily see him getting into office and then just continuing the Bush/Obama years. Or I could see him getting into office and being a truly great conservative President. I just don't know.

CrispyRice said...

My 1st thought is -- this election should be like taking candy from a baby. (Ohh, how we conservatives love to do that, right??) So why the heck haven't we had a decent candidate who really has rallied everyone?? UGH!

I could get solidly behind Ryan.

AndrewPrice said...

Crispy, I think a lot of people could get behind Ryan. And you're right, this should be like taking candy from a baby. Sadly, Republicans seem to be very bad at that. . . or those babies are tougher than they seem?

rlaWTX said...

That was Jack Ryan - although he became President too...

[no T-Rav response to the cat question -- hmmmm, what is he hiding???]

I like Perry well enough - I'd vote for him again - part of my hesitance is related to him having to run against Bush as well as Obama.

The vaccine issue was the mandate of a new vaccine for 8-12yo girls for a disease that is essentially an STD. That rubbed people the wrong way. However! I read a pretty good response to this issue on NRO - I think it was under M Malkin's insane Perry attack, but it might have been one of the other Perry response threads - anyway basically said that it was a response to getting ahead of HpV in Hispanic girls who are sexually active younger and whose parents are undereducated on health issues.

AndrewPrice said...

rlaWTX, T-Rav has been suspiciously silent on the cat issue, hasn't he?

I didn't know that Michelle Malkin attacked Perry? I'll have to look for that.

On the vaccine issue, the problem is that there has been this whole insane conspiracy network that has evolved which is opposed to vaccines in general on some rather lunatic bases. And if we gave in to these people, the country would be awash in a ton of horrible, easily treatable diseases, that would be killing and maiming millions of people.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, MythBusters has proven that taking candy from a baby is not that easy. Or at least I think they did. Actually, I could be making that up.

If I remember right, a lot of people were up in arms about the HPV vaccination thing not because of vaccinations in general but because they thought this would be a de facto license for teenage sexual activity by taking away one of the consequences. I don't understand the facts behind the issue well enough to have a solid opinion on it.

T-Rav said...

rla, I don't understand the question.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, The question is simple. You are a notice cat assassin... a "catssassin" as it were. Yet, you have a cat. Can you explain this discrepancy?

On the vaccine thing, I know that was part of the furor, but at its core was this strange opposition to vaccinations -- which seems to be spreading in fact.

T-Rav said...

Oh. I did say that, didn't I? Hmmm...

Look. I never said I hated cats. I merely said that I shoot them in the face occasionally. That's all. If you have an issue with that logic, go talk to Bev, who doesn't like cats at all, and yet somehow, every time I bring my hobby up, "The Management" gets on my case about it. If such a contradiction can exist for her (or them), I figure it can for me, too. So there.

AndrewPrice said...

Very well T-Rav, I shall live with your contradiction. Life is about contradictions after all. :-)

Just wanted to make sure you weren't secretly working for the cats!

Koshcat said...

Cats are awesome.

Very excited about this "rumor". One weakness would be foreign policy, but that is where choosing a solid vice-president can help. Unfortunately, none of the current candidates fit well either, except maybe Huntsman, which is sad.

Just to watch Democrats head explode, I would love to see someone like Ryan get elected and then choose Bolton as his secretary of state.

Andrew, figure out where he is staying in CO and maybe we can sit outside his door begging for his candidacy.

Joel Farnham said...


What I know of the HPV debacle is that Perry thought it is a good idea that all children get it. He decided unilaterally to write an executive order mandating all the children get it. It consists of three shots at $120 a shot. The Texas legislature twice decided differently. The first one was sent through and was vetoed, the second time was over Perry's veto. It came out later that the Manufacturer of the HPV vaccine is a good buddy of Perry's. Cries of Crony Capitalism arose.

The other part is how HPV is transmitted. Through sexual intercourse. The Christian Crowd didn't like that. So, the libertarians got involved along with the Christians and the people who don't like Perry and .... you know the rest.

Perry gets partial credit with his non-apology apology. It is a black ..... er uhh. He put himself on the wrong side of the political equation. He lost. (I don't want Shultzie to accuse me of racism.)

On the whole anti-vaccination kick, for some reason, there are people who think that kids acquire Autism from getting vaccinated too early. It could be true, but like global warming, assumptions are being made before there is proof. Also, Autism is the disease du-jour. There is proof that some cases of Autism are misdiagnosed. Also, schools get EXTRA money for teaching kids with Autism.

AndrewPrice said...

Koshcat, I tried to figure it out earlier but couldn't. I seriously would have sent him a check and maybe stood outside with a sign. :-)

I'm excited about this rumor too and I hope that with more and more people talking about it (talk radio mentioned it a lot today and yesterday) that this means it's more likely to happen. I think he would really excite people!

Bolton as SoS would be great! Could you imagine? Democratic heads would explode. Plus, he would make a great SoS.

Foreign policy experience is a weakness within the entire field, but frankly, it's not like that's something Obama can brag about. His foreign policy has been a total failure no matter how you look at it.

thundercatkp said...

I thought T-Rav was secretly working for the zombie?! Sometimes drowning the kittens work best. Actually we have a couple that I threaten with calling T-Rav ever now and then.

I don't really like an of the candidates right now. It depends a lot on who Ron Paul's running mate is (I'm not saying I like Ron Paul) as to how he does in the end, he is getting old and might not make it full term. I did read he has the most conservative voting record in Congress since 1937.

In an all night internet search a few nights ago...looking for what the inner city voter was getting ;)...I read alot about candidates.

I kinda like Cain from what I read. Guess I'll just have to wait and see...I really do hope someone enters the campaign that would represent me better or at least picks a good running mate.

Interesting things I found out:

~~>Huntsman spent 2 yrs serving as a Mormon missionary in Taiwan.
~~>Roemer has decided to not accept donations from PACs and is even limiting individual donations to $100.
~~>Santorum is the person who first introduced the term "Islamic Fascism".
~~>A couple of the canidates are just consired a publicity stunt.
*****Most importent thing I learned.....NEVER NEVER show try to show Joel an article from Politico when trying to make a will not get past the laugher.

patti said...

this is very interesting. can't wait to see your overview.

perry gives me the blahs as a contender. but i LOVE how he puts the MSM panties in a wad at every opportunity.

Joel Farnham said...


I like Bolton as the Vice President. It would feel like Dick Cheney all over again. Ryan and Bolton. Together at last.:-) I would love to see Bolton debate Biden. That would be like putting Hulk Hogan in with Michael J. Fox.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, The recent tide of autism is indeed a scam, just like ADD was a scam in the prior decade. It's about money for schools, selling drugs, the path-of-least-resistance doctoring, and excusing misbehavior. That's not to say that there aren't genuinely autistic kids, but there are far, far too many fake cases.

You're right about the non-link link to autism. It's bad science. In fact, if I recall correctly, the big study that kicked everything off was even disgraced a couple years ago. But once one of these things starts, it takes on a life of its own. Never mind that not vaccinating kids will destroy millions of lives.

On Perry, I hadn't heard the crony capitalism bit, but that is even more discouraging. That really raises the specter that he will repeat the mistakes of Bush/Obama. Ug.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, I'm not sure who is behind the autism scam, but it is surely a scam, regardless. I think a lot of these "autistic" kids are simply quirky ones who get marked with the diagnosis by people who don't know better.

The medical "experts" are the real problem, in my opinion. A few weeks ago I was listening to a CBS News report about a South Korean study or something that diagnosed children with more energy or difficulty paying attention with borderline ADHD, and therefore in need of stultifying medication. When asked by Couric or whoever was anchoring, "What about those who question this study or the necessity of medication?" the medical expert called in for his opinion said knowingly, "Well, those parents should know that without medication, their kids will have much more trouble later in life." Translation: Give our drugs to your kids or they will suffer. And I'm sure the same thing happens with autism. Disgusting.

T-Rav said...

Wait a minute, thundercat...I'm not sure how I feel about being an assassin-for-hire :-)

Ron Paul? You're seriously thinking about Ron Paul?!? Don't do it! It's a trap!

thundercatkp said...

On study I read said "...about MMR vaccinations has disclosed to The Telegraph that he has identified nearly 170 cases of a new syndrome of autism and bowel disease in children who have had the triple-dose injection." Even if the study was right that number is far less than the number of kids that would actually get measles, mumps and rubella. If they didn't get the vaccinations.

This always made me mad when a mother would say I don't want my child vaccinated because...blah blah reason. I wanted tell them fine guess we'll see you later in the year when your child has measles. Grrrr, sorry pet peeve

AndrewPrice said...

thundercat, Politico is left leaning and has several George Soros trained writers on staff. They do get some good news, but you can't trust how they present it or how they analyze it.

In terms of some candidates being a publicity stunt, there are always candidates' whose sole goal is to increase their name recognition or to get some particular issue brought to the front burner.

AndrewPrice said...

patti, I'm with you 100% on that! The MSM has no idea how to handle him and that's great!

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, I don't think Bolton has the name recognition to make a great VP. I think Ryan (or whoever) would want someone bigger. Plus, I don't think foreign policy experience will be a good selling point in this election.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, The whole ADD or ADHD industry depends on convincing parents that any child who isn't perfect needs medication. Everyone involved is to blame. Too many parents want to believe that their kid isn't perfect because of a medical condition rather than bad parenting. Too many doctors take the path of least resistance and willingly give parents medication they don't need just to shut them up. (You see the same thing with antibiotics, which is becoming a serious problem as it's making antibiotics ineffective). Drug companies push the drugs with these incredibly generic "tests" that are just marketing tools designed to make people think they are sick. Schools play into it by giving additional benefits to these kids. Governments play into it by giving schools more money to handle these kids. It's despicable.

The autism thing is the same thing with a slightly different disease name.

What's even worse, there are kids who really need help. But the resources for them are being used by the kids who are simply misbehaved.

And now they are trying to blame vaccinations for a fake disease and that runs the risk of these kids becoming literal plague carriers.

thundercatkp said...


I didn't say I liked Ron Paul. I do like that he votes conservative. I also like that he wants to phase out the Federal Reserve and that he wants to withdraw from from the UN and NATO.
Plus he'll be like 77 years old if elected and if he had a great running mate...well I would consider it.

I like Cain because I think anyone that can take a Burger King in the least profitable region and in 3 yrs turn it into the most profitable, actually knows how to get things done. I also like he wants to repeal and replace Obama's healthcare reform, and cut federal depts (I do think only by 10% is to low). I also like that he said he wouldn't appoint Muslims to his cabinet. (I believe in profiling people, because it works) I don't like he backed the wall street bailout though.

...I see you didn't deny the secretly working with zombies :) You never know assassin-for-hire, it might have its perks ;)

AndrewPrice said...

thundercat, When Maryland made it a requirement that kids get vaccinated before they could go to school, they discovered that there were black schools where over 60% of the kids were not vaccinated. Many of them believed that vaccines were a government plot to make blacks sterile or spread HIV. Which is of course a total lie, but many people want to believe the impossible.

With vaccinations, it is a well-known fact that some very small percentage of kids will have an adverse reaction that can lead to very bad things. But we're talking about a few thousand kids out of tens of millions. If you don't give vaccines, you're talking about millions of kids getting things like Polio and spreading diseases that can be fatal. It's one of those choices society makes and it's a wise choice.

thundercatkp said...

In my opinion some teachers use the ADD or ADHD thing just to zombify the students. If they don't sit still or are easily distracted they want to blame it on ADD or ADHD. (My son's teacher actually suggested he be tested. I said ok test away, nothing more came of that...I'm guess he didn't show signs if ADD or ADHD)

Maybe it's the teacher not knowing how to teach 8 year olds. Or not to sit certain kids together. (I know as soon as this one little girl moved away my son talked more about what he learned than about that little girl.)

When I really wanted to get Joel ranting for the fun of it...I just bring up how much Jacob liked Obama and the Obama song...heehee

thundercatkp said...

Andrew, I'm all for the vaccinations. To bad they don't make one for stupidity. Then some of theses moms wouldn't be so ignorant. Hell maybe 1/2 America wouldn't be. ...just saying ;)

AndrewPrice said...

A vaccination for stupidity would be great! The question is, how do you get all those liberals to take it?

thundercatkp said...


Joel Farnham said...


With ADHD, a unique way of describing normal boyhood behavior, it is worse. What happened is that the drug companies got together with school officials and mentioned something along the lines of "Some of your students exhibit this ADHD behavior. We have this new drug that corrects it. Ritalin. (Adderall for those who work for a different drug company.)

This coincided with a cutting down of recess time. Too many boys became overactive with too much energy. Teachers saw the effects of putting some these boys on Ritalin. All of a sudden, it is the new miracle drug to help with the boy's bad behavior. Funny how the girls with the good behavior didn't need it. Never mind the fact that for years, teachers knew of this phenomena of boys being active and girls being passive. For some strange reason, the NOW gang likes this drug.

thundercatkp said...


Girls passive? Hmmmmm, I think your mistaking being passive for know when to let it go and knowing when to stand your ground. ;)

Oh wait we are talking about school kids...

Joel Farnham said...

I love you too honey. :-)

I suppose Uhg, way back when, could have been passive around that sabre tooth. Good thing he wasn't.

thundercatkp said...

Yeah...Joel...I'm just confused now, but no need to explain it. Love ya too :-*

T-Rav said...

Okay, that's enough schmoozing you two.

Any assassin requests will need to be filled out in triplicate, one form for me, one form for the zombies, and one form for their HR rep. The zombies have also begun demanding extra compensation due to "occupational hazards." I'm trying to get them to scale back their figures, but in the meantime, it is what it is.

AndrewPrice said...

On Perry, there is an interesting article at the Washington Examiner today about his connections with Big Business. It is the sort of thing that concerns me with a Perry presidency. Here's the link.


thundercatkp said...

That was sarcasm not schmoozing.

I liked Perry until I dug deeper than just what he was saying on Twitter. Now I get a bad feeling about him.

Joel Farnham said...


Here is one on Paul Ryan, same place.


I take it you are not married.

Joel Farnham said...

Sorry Andrew,

For some reason, I keep getting Ron Paul and Paul Ryan mixed up.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, Yeah, I saw that. As I've said before, there's a lot to like about Ron Paul and a lot to fear. He would make an interesting President, but he wouldn't last a month before they impeached him to save the union.

thundercatkp said...

Operation: Divert, Daze and Confusion taking initial effects on Joel...evil laugh

T-Rav said...

Joel, I'm 23 and a cash-poor TA trying to avoid having to take out student loans. If I decided to get married (even assuming there was a prospective Mrs. T-Rav at hand), my mother would give me the beatdown of the decade.

T-Rav said...

On the subject of Ron Paul!, the Daily Caller had a brutal takedown of the congressman and his supporters today. It's five pages long but it's worth reading, notwithstanding the frenzied counterattacks by Paulites in the comments section.

thundercatkp said...

This might be a dumb question but here it is anyway: Why do people take the straw poll so seriously. To me it's like asking a bunch of kids Who likes candy? It doesn't mean much and you already know the answer because of the people your I said maybe a dumb question.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, Here's your link: LINK. Paul is trouble. There's no doubt about that. And I think a lot of his followers are hoping for the country's destruction. I don't think Paul is, but I think a lot of his followers are.

Thundercat, I don't even know why people take Iowa seriously. I think the only reason it matters is that people wrongly believe it's the first "real" sign of the public's support. And they think it's an indication of how the Iowa caucuses will go.

thundercatkp said...

My first thought is...the public's dumb...but that's not nice.

I would like to see a study done on straw poll voters and how many actually end up voting the way they did at the straw poll....hell I'm guess more than half won't remember who they voted for in which straw poll.

T-Rav said...

thundercat, the straw poll and all things Iowa matter because they matter. Yes, it's circular; what I mean is Iowa, for whatever reason, was determined to be a litmus test for presidential candidates and their viability, and now all politicos assume that it's a necessary first hurdle to getting the nomination. If you don't do well there, money men and grassroots activists start doubting whether you can hack it in the nation at large, and you have a self-fulfilling prophecy on your hands. So Iowa's importance is completely artificial. And if you ever tell that to a caucus voter in Iowa, you're likely to be run out of town on a rail.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, I've met too many of his supporters. They're either kooks, or they're dumb college kids who only like Paul because he would allow a liberal morality (drugs, sex, etc.). When it comes to economics, they either don't care or they want the government teat. I still would like to know how many of his supporters wound up voting for Obama in '08.

AndrewPrice said...

thundercat, I saw something the other day that said the Iowa straw poll has almost never predicted the nominee. I can't remember the numbers, but it was really low.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I've fought with some of them too and I've found three groups in his hard-core ranks.

1. The first group is stupid college kids who think he will legalize drugs and don't care about anything else.

2. The second is people who think they know what the constitution stands for and they think of themselves as "constitutionalists." But they don't really understand the document. They are like people who can quote 2-3 Bible verses and have interpreted those into some deep understanding of the hidden mystery within the Bible. Essentially, they are a non-religious cult.

3. The third group want Paul to dismantle the government and turn the US to a state of near anarchy. These losers have fantasies of themselves as great leaders ready to step in once the anarchy has brought down the powers that be. It's a survivalist jerk off fantasy.

Don't get me wrong, Paul does have more normal supporters and I don't attribute the beliefs of any of these three groups above to Paul, but I think those are the fringers who have latched onto Paul.

thundercatkp said...


Liberal morality??? I'm lost and now getting a lecture in Libertarian believes, thanks;)

Any if that was true why doesn't Gary Johnson have more supporters? He's an Advocate for the legalization of marijuana. Plus he climbed Mt. Everest. So he's a cool dude. (Playful sarcasism here, some poeple don't get my humor)


I have been lead to believe I won't mention Joel's name...that one of the reasons Pawlenty dropped out was the recent straw poll. It seems to me that if you're willing to drop out so fast you don't have much character in the first good riddance.

Thundercat ducks, dodges and runs........

T-Rav said...

Careful...Pawlenty got the most positive review from Andrew thus far (next to what I suspect Ryan will get). Better watch your back.

thundercatkp said...

OMG...I think I'm a Libertarian. I agree with most of their Platform.

I think the government should only concern themselves with 3 things;

1. National Defense
2. Protecting Borders
3. Maintain the Hwy system

I'm still not saying I like Ron Paul. I think he is kinda a nut case. I also think most republicans are just as wishy washy as the liberals and democrats. Hell even the campign canidiates can't pick a side and stay on it. gentle ;)

darski said...

I realize I really don't get a vote on this one but I think it is a bad idea. He would be wasted in the Oval office when he needs to be in the office of the exchequer IYKWIM.

Presidents are a dime a dozen. (good) Financiers are the cream of the crop

AndrewPrice said...

darski, That's something to consider, where would he do the most good. That's a tough question.

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Of course when I got home the power went out until late last night. I tried to tell you all them Transformers were real.
Not sure what took ours out, but I got a saw buck says it's the Decepticons.

Yes, it is odd that there's a fringe group on the left (Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carey was/is spreading a lot of that false information about vaccines causing autism) and a fringe group on the right that believes the same thing (not counting some of the Christians who are insulted that their children might have sex someday before they die).

All accounts I have read have said that a majority of Americans carry the HPV virus. Not all go on to get cancer but clearly, some do.

I would think that even if a child remains a virgin until they are married (and good for them if they do) there's still a chance that their spouse might have HPV unless they were also a virgin).

Regardless, the argument that giving this immunization somehow gives kids the impression it's okay to have sex whenever they want is ludicrous.

And consequences? Really? Some of these parents believe their kids should suffer possible cancer if they mess up and have sex?

Most loving parents want their children to be immunized against anything detrimental to their health, escpecially cancer.

Anyways, the idiocy of these fringe groups is bad enough but when this propaganda (for whatever reason) spreads diseases that can be prevented...well, I can only hope that most adults will listen to reason.
Otherwise, we'll have lots of future epidemics to deal with and a lot of needless suffering and deaths.

Perhaps part of the problem is that many young people today have no idea how devastating these diseases can be.
It's not real.

It's one thing to have book knowledge, and that's good, but that knowledge is always more effective if one can experience it and see it, such as in third world countries.

Unfortunately, the fringe groups prey on that lack of direct experience.
Shame on these actors, preachers, parents, politicians, etc. that spread this disinformation!

AndrewPrice said...

Ben, I agree entirely.

I think a big part of the problem is that when everything is going well, it's very easy to forget how bad things can be and to downplay the risks.

I too would have thought that parents would be less short-sighted when it comes to their kids, but apparently a good of them are indeed short-sighted.

And you're right about the ludicrousness of thinking that giving a kid a vaccine that stops cancer will somehow encourage them to go out and have sex. It's bizzaro world thinking.

Joel Farnham said...

Ben and Andrew,

You miss the real point in all of this. Perry felt that the Texan people were too STUPID to make up their own minds about taking this easy prevention. HE DECIDED FOR THESE PEOPLE, regardless of their personal choices. It is NANNY STATE (PERRY) knows best. And it isn't as if there was an raging epidemic of cervical cancer breaking out as we speak that threatens the world as we know it.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, The opposition I've seen has all been conspiracy based, not based on lack of a public vote. Also, I understand that 20 other states have done this now without any of the trouble that arose in Texas.

Joel Farnham said...


Perry should not have mandated the vaccine. He should have allowed public pressure and common sense prevail. With welfare mothers, it could easily be added as a condition of getting public assistance. Basically Perry overstepped.

Virginia is the only state to mandate it. Washington DC is NOT a state. Right now legislation has passed to overturn the mandate in Virginia. It might not pass it's Senate. In the end, it will probably only be mandated in DC.

thundercatkp said...

Grrrrr.....CDC reference

n 2007 (the most recent year numbers are available)—

12,280 women in the United States were diagnosed with cervical cancer

4,021 women in the United States died from cervical cancer.

Incidence counts cover approximately 99% of the U.S. population. Death counts cover 100% of the U.S. population. Use caution in comparing incidence and death counts.

Might not sound like much...but I know I don't wanta gamble on my daughter being one of them.

thundercatkp said...

"...public pressure and common sense...."

I'm not sure public and common sense should ever be in the same sentence. I find myself humming:

One of these things is not like the others,
One of these things just doesn't belong,
Can you tell which thing is not like the others....hummmmhummm

AndrewPrice said...

thundercat, Don't worry about the Pawlenty thing, I'm not invested in any of the candidates. T-Rav is just having fun with the fact I've found big flaws in them all.

thundercatkp said...


I'm cool with ya ;)


T-Rav said...

Andrew, what kind of life would I have if I didn't poke fun? :-)

Post a Comment