Erick Erickson's Blog, page 26

Michelle Obama Poisons America’s Food Supply. Gives Kids Listeria.

Michelle Obama has poisoned the nation’s food supply and potentially given listeria to America’s children, according to press reports.

Food inspectors have discovered listeria in packaged apple slices destined for McDonald’s, Burger King, and various grocery stores.

It was Michelle Obama’s push for healthier eating that led fast food restaurants to begin including apple slices in their kids’ meals.

Now, you and I may think it is outrageous to claim that Michelle Obama had anything to do with food poisoning America’s youth. You and I would be right to think it is outrageous. But if MItt Romney is responsible for Joe Soptic’s wife dying of cancer almost a decade after Mitt Romney left Bain Capital’s day to day management, it is only fair to use the same kind of stupidity logic to point out Michelle Obama is giving kids listeria.

What’s fair is fair, right?

If Only Paul Ryan’s Plan Were as Radical as the Democrats Claim

“Choice for Republicans involves trusting the American people to handle their affairs and retirement. Choice for Democrats involves only the option to kill children, with everything else pre-packaged in one size fits all government bureaucracy.”

It is mathematically indisputable that should President Barack Obama obtain his legislative desire and increase taxes on those making $250,000.00 a year or more the nation would not close even this year’s budget deficit. Never mind the $16 trillion in national debt, the income brought in through that tax increase would not balance this year’s federal budget.

It is also mathematically indisputable that should the Democrats’ obtain the ultimate fantasy of the grade school marxists routinely populating the ranks of left-wing economists, more commonly referred to as the “Occupy Wall Street” movement — confiscating 100% of income from all those making $250,000.00 a year or more — the nation still would not close this year’s budget deficit.

Marxist sounding pablum about the rich paying their fair share and not building their businesses aside, the Democrats’ covetousness of American salaries accomplishes nothing more than temporarily satiating their addiction to spending. Paul Ryan, as Mitt Romney’s Vice Presidential nominee, has made a career of shining the spotlight on the Democrats’ addiction to spending.

Paul Ryan’s budget plan, called the “Path to Prosperity” has become a necessary lightening rod on the road to fiscal sanity. Because of the President’s spending addiction, the nation has been without a real budget for more than one thousand days. President Obama’s budget plans for the past few years have been too radical even for the most radical Democrats in Congress, failing to pass even the Democrat controlled Senate with a single vote.

Despite the rhetoric from spending addicts on the left, Paul Ryan’s plan is not the radical path conservatives would prefer. The plan does not balance the federal budget for three decades and is premised on the assumption that future congresses will show restraint. Three decades is an extraordinarily long time, but the plan does eventually balance, which is something the President’s own budget never does.

The Democrats will demagogue Paul Ryan’s budget plan. They already have run commercials showing a Paul Ryan look alike shoving a grandmother off a cliff. The hysteria ignores that under Paul Ryan’s plan senior citizens will not see their medicare benefits affected.

Under his slow moving plan, people 55 and younger begin to have choices they can make about their future retirement and healthcare needs. The Ryan plan moves people fully out of the present failing system into more modern options within the control of the taxpayer himself. But it only does so for people more than a decade away from retiring. For taxpayers who increasingly distrust Washington and who think the present system will not be their for them anyway, it gives them control of their future in a way Democrats only talk about about.

Choice for Republicans involves trusting the American people to handle their affairs and retirement. Choice for Democrats involves only the option to kill children, with everything else pre-packaged in one size fits all government bureaucracy. These two visions of choice will be at the heart of the 2012 Presidential campaign season.

Paul Ryan’s plan, sadly, is not nearly as aggressive as it should be or could be. It takes too long to balance the budget. It keeps too many people in the present entitlement system for too long. But it begins, at least, to fix the system and give choices about retirement and healthcare the present system does not.

More importantly, this “Path to Prosperity” tackles issues directly weighing on our economy and future that President Obama has had four years to tackle and chose demagoguery and passing the buck instead. As Ed Morrisey notes over at Hot Air, even Erskine Bowles of the Bowles-Simpson Commission called Paul Ryan’s plan “honest” and “serious” and took issue with President Obama “for dishonestly attempting to evade a true comparison and for back-loading cuts in order to claim $4 trillion in reductions over 12 years.”

Paul Ryan’s plan exist. Barack Obama’s is just three card monty.

More on the Winning Argument

In USA Today, Instapundit Glenn Reynolds quotes Iowahawk: “Paul Ryan represents Obama’s most horrifying nightmare: Math.”

Let me break the math down for you.

If Barack Obama gets his way and raises taxes on everyone making $250,000.00 a year or more, the amount of money he brings in will not close his own budget deficit. Nevermind the national debt — he won’t close this year’s budget deficit.

In fact, if we get the Democrats’ their wet dream of tax policy and take 100% of all annual income of everyone making $250,000.00 a year or more, we still won’t close Barack Obama’s budget deficit.

So what do we cut? What do we do? That’s the genius of the Paul Ryan pick. He forces the Democrats to confront the reality of their policies, not just their bumper sticker demagoguery packed in grade school marxist rhetoric about fair shares and the rich.

The Democrats are, right now, winning the votes of people in the middle class though their policies are screwing the middle class. Once you point out the very simple, very understandable math, suddenly the middle class realizes the Democrats are coming for them next.

Oh, and Steny Hoyer, the House Democratic Whip, already said as much.

The Argument

Saturday on Twitter, my buddy Tom Crowe summed up what the two Presidential campaigns are all about:

So #2012election comes down to GOP: “We trust you.” vs. Dems: “Trust us.”

— Tom Crowe (@TomCrowe) August 11, 2012

This should not be a hard sell.

Americans remain pessimistic about the economy and future.

The news continues to be bad.

And in Barack Obama’s America, it is no longer enough to work hard to succeed. You also have to make a campaign donation to Obama for America.

There is a story to be told. Solyndra, Ener1, etc. etc. etc.

It is troubling that Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are tied on the ability to fix the economy. It is troubling that in a recent Reuters poll more Americans thought Barack Obama was more likely to fix the economy than Mitt Romney.

Mitt Romney did not have a lot of money to burn over the summer months. But there is a creeping pessimism in the ranks of many Republican strategists that the team in Boston is out to lunch.

Paul Ryan was an excellent pick. He can help make the campaign proactive and not just hanging out for more bad jobs numbers. But the campaign needs to engage and there are some stories out there just waiting to be told by some Super PACs who supposedly have lots of money.

It’s time to make the case — the GOP trusts the American people. Barack Obama wants everyone to trust him. That trust got us Solyndra, Obamacare, Fast & Furious, and so much more that no one wants.

Greater Risk. Greater Reward.

I expected Mitt Romney to pick Bob McDonnell as his running mate. I’ve said repeatedly that my two choices were either Bobby Jindal or Paul Ryan, but I expected Bob McDonnell. I’m delighted I got who I wanted and not who I expected. Paul Ryan is a daring choice.

I’ve talked to a lot of Republicans over the weekend and 48 hours after Paul Ryan stepped out at the USS Wisconsin to become Mitt Romney’s running mate, there is a rumbling of nervous excitement, but also some serious worry. There is a pretty clear consensus that Paul Ryan as the veep pick was actually a dangerous and very risky pick signaling Romney’s internal polling might not be so great in swing states. At the same time, everyone largely acknowledges that there is, in the greater risk of the pick, a greater reward if the Romney-Ryan ticket wins.

Why dangerous and risky?

First, picking Paul Ryan ties MItt Romney to the Ryan budget plan. This now turns the election into a choice between Barack Obama’s way forward and the Romney-Ryan way forward. The race is no longer a referendum on Barack Obama’s job. No one doubts Barack Obama has a better chance when the election is a choice between two competing visions and not just a referendum on his failure.

Second, it muddies the message. Instead of a race focused on the economy, we are suddenly entering a race about the economy and medicare, medicaid, and social security without being able to throw Obamacare at Barack Obama.

Third, because of the first two, Florida is now even more in play and several Republicans I talked to say it makes Florida more friendly toward Barack Obama. This relates to the senior vote and a suspicion the Romney team cannot competently execute counter measures against the coming demagoguery.

Why the reward if they pull it off?

Everyone knows what Paul Ryan brings to the table. If Romney-Ryan wins, suddenly they can make a real case for entitlement reform, smaller government, and debt reduction based on spending cuts, not tax increases.

Ben Domenech’s thinking sums up a lot of what I’ve been hearing and I share his thinking:

The decision to pick Ryan is not a safe one, however. And it is a definite break with the path that Team Romney has adopted to this point—one which adopted the sit-on-your-hands restraint Ryan spoke of in 2011 with such disdain, essentially attempting to make the first Friday of every month Romney’s running mate. And in accepting this advice and choosing Ryan, the Romney Team is indicating that they may very well be more desperate than they let on. This is not a pick you make if you are confident you are ahead or tied. It is the kind of pick you make when you think you are behind.

Because I do think Romney is behind—in the sense that if the election was today, I do believe he would lose—I think it is a selection worth the risk.

Most everyone I talked to was excited by Paul Ryan as the choice, but they all shared apprehension. The chief apprehension is very simple — there is a growing sense among Republicans that Mitt Romney’s team has a repeated and serious failure to execute.

Paul Ryan, as the veep pick, is a recognition of this. Romney needed to do something beyond a boring pick to get momentum back. More than that, Paul Ryan is a brilliant spokesman on budget issues and on economic issues. He understands the free market and is not afraid to zealously advocate for it and defend it.

The Romney team is going to have to sell this. They’re going to get hit hard on “mediscare” and will need to be able to nimbly counter-punch. Paul Ryan has several times in the past year already made the best case — Barack Obama has had one term and failed to even deal with these issues.

If the Romney team can execute a strategy that ties economic reform with entitlement reform, they’ll have a winning play against Barack Obama, whose singular achievement in office remains a failed healthcare plan that will wreck our economy and our healthcare system in the process.

Again though, tempering all the excitement many Republicans have over Paul Ryan as the veep pick is a lingering doubt that the Romney team really has what it takes.

Morning Briefing for August 13, 2012

RedState Morning Briefing

August 13, 2012

Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.

1. The Argument

2. Greater Risk. Greater Reward.

3. These are the words of a man who should be (Vice) President

4. Obama cuts Medicare more than Romney would

5. Beyond Boycotting, Upset Unions to Picket DNC’s Charlotte Convention

6. Does Drilling in ANWR Make More Sense than the Alaskan Offshore?

———————————————————————-

1. The Argument

Saturday on Twitter, my buddy Tom Crowe summed up what the two Presidential campaigns are all about:

So #2012election comes down to GOP: “We trust you.” vs. Dems: “Trust us.”

This should not be a hard sell.

Americans remain pessimistic about the economy and future.

The news continues to be bad.

And in Barack Obama’s America, it is no longer enough to work hard to succeed. You also have to make a campaign donation to Obama for America.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

2. Greater Risk. Greater Reward.

I expected Mitt Romney to pick Bob McDonnell as his running mate. I’ve said repeatedly that my two choices were either Bobby Jindal or Paul Ryan, but I expected Bob McDonnell. I’m delighted I got who I wanted and not who I expected. Paul Ryan is a daring choice.

I’ve talked to a lot of Republicans over the weekend and 48 hours after Paul Ryan stepped out at the USS Wisconsin to become Mitt Romney’s running mate, there is a rumbling of nervous excitement, but also some serious worry. There is a pretty clear consensus that Paul Ryan as the veep pick was actually a dangerous and very risky pick signaling Romney’s internal polling might not be so great in swing states. At the same time, everyone largely acknowledges that there is, in the greater risk of the pick, a greater reward if the Romney-Ryan ticket wins.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

3. These are the words of a man who should be (Vice) President

Last week Charles Krauthammer wrote a column that I consider one of his best in quite a while, titled “The case against re-election.” In it, he examined Obama’s failed programs and legislation and the potential campaign strategy for Mitt Romney. Krauthammer’s most important point focused on how important it is for Mitt Romney – and now Paul Ryan – to campaign against Obama on ideological grounds.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

4. Obama cuts Medicare more than Romney would

To borrow a phrase from President Reagan, there they go again.

As soon as Mitt Romney announced Congressman Paul Ryan as his vice presidential running mate the Democrats again started with their debunked and discredited MediScare campaign. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee called Ryan “the architect of the Republican plan to kill Medicare” in a fundraising message sent by DCCC Executive Director Robby Mook. A false charge that the left-leaning Politifact called the 2011 “lie of the year.”

Please click here for the rest of the post.

5. Beyond Boycotting, Upset Unions to Picket DNC’s Charlotte Convention

Despite throwing 400,000 foot soldiers into the effort to re-elect Barack Obama, union bosses are apparently still seething at the DNC’s decision to hold its convention in a [gasp!] Right-to-Work state.

Last year, when the DNC announced that it would be holding its convention in Charlotte, North Carolina—the least unionized state in the nation (in a stadium built by non-union labor!)—several unions claimed they would be boycotting the convention.

The boycott, according to USA Today, is hampering the DNC’s fundraising efforts.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

6. Does Drilling in ANWR Make More Sense than the Alaskan Offshore?

At this writing, Shell Oil is awaiting final permits from the Department of the Interior and EPA to drill two of five wells in the Arctic Ocean offshore Alaska that were originally planned for 2012. Later than normal breakup of pack ice also caused Shell some delays.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

Not Enough

Just under a month ago, I wrote

Of all the people to not be beating up Mitt Romney for his present not quite stellar campaign, I find myself in that position.

I’m genuinely not that worried.

I am still not worried, but I am getting concerned. This election is trending away from Romney as the economy deteriorates and more Americans believe the economy is getting worse. That should be a red flag for the GOP.

[image error]During the month of June, Barack Obama had a terrible month. Since then, he has continued to make some serious flubs. But through it all, Team Romney has really failed to capitalize on those stumbles and Romney has had a bad month himself. His message has not broken.

He tried an international trip and timed it during the opening ceremonies of the Olympic Games. It got little attention except for his own missteps.

Today, he announced a very bold pick in Paul Ryan. This forces the message to be about the economy and our long term future. It is a fight worth having and one we can win. But I am less and less confident that Team Romney, as presently constituted, can win that fight.

Picking Paul Ryan must be the beginning of a campaign shake up, not the end.

Consider that in all the polling in August, from Gallup to CNN to Fox News, Barack Obama is ahead. You can take issue with one or two of the polls, but the trend is consistent.

Another trend is consistent.

Mitt Romney continues to outperform Barack Obama on key issues like the economy, jobs, and the national debt — the very issues the campaign is about, yet he is still behind.

Part of it is the summer doldrums. Part of it is Romney not having a lot of money to spend until officially accepting the Republican nomination. But a good part of it is Romney’s team. Several of them have been touting themselves and how awesome they are instead of the candidate. Let’s not forget the Stu Stevens hagiography. Eric Fehrnstrom and Andrea Saul have made their own missteps that have taken away from key momentum.

Today, the Romney camp sent out a talking points sheet claiming that while picking Paul Ryan, Romney had his own budget plans. This is delusional and not credible spin. You pick Paul Ryan, you defend his budget. It is that simple. That one bullet point sums up a summer of dysfunction. The Romney team seems to be believing its own spin, which can often lead to disaster.

Team Romney-Ryan has the chance for a real reboot. But it is one they need to take it. While I am not yet worried, I am concerned by the consistent propensity of Team Romney to not capitalize on Barack Obama’s missteps and to trip over their own feet when they get ahead.

Paul Ryan is not enough. Mitt Romney does need to prune and fertilizer his campaign team.

Paul Ryan: Where Things Stand

Paul Ryan is not a safe pick. In fact, it is a pick that suggests Mitt Romney knows he needs to shift momentum in the race. When the GOP is winning on all the major polling questions of debt, deficit, and economy and still losing overall — the polling can’t all be wrong, including Fox News — the Romney camp needs a new direction and a more focused message.

What they had been doing was not and is not working.

Paul Ryan works. The most recently named Human Events Conservative of the Year is a lightening rod on the left for the Ryan plan, which balances the budget over the next two decades. What was not enough for some conservatives is too much for some liberals. Paul Ryan exposes the left’s great lie. They think they can just raise taxes on those who make $250,000.00 a year or more and never have to cut spending or fix entitlements.

Paul Ryan not only exposes that lie, but he has plans to solve it. He does so as a fresh, young face who is not at all scary to old people and relates to them and to young people. He himself is in his early 40′s with small kids. He’s from a swing state, out performed John McCain in his home district, and is telegenic and articulate. Paul Ryan is what Mitt Romney needs.

The left will demonize and demagogue Paul Ryan. They’d do that to anyone. This is a party that is currently accusing MItt Romney of murder and previously accused Paul Ryan of killing old people. The only problem is, the old people are receptive to Paul Ryan’s message. The bluster you hear today is a Democratic Party excited to have their bogey man as the Republican veep pick, with a little bit of nervous apprehension about what Ryan is capable of.

The sighs you hear are Republicans sighing some relief. Finally, the Romney campaign has a spokesman who can do what Mitt Romney has never been capable of doing — defend success and articulate a message of why we must reform our nation’s budget and support free markets.

After all the Romney campaign missteps and flubs of the past few weeks, I am encouraged. But we should be clear here: it is not enough, but it is an excellent start to a reboot.

Mitt to Announce Veep Tomorrow [UPDATED]

No offense, but I intend to be sleeping at 9am tomorrow when Mitt Romney makes his Vice Presidential announcement at the USS Wisconsin.

The buzz tonight is that it is Paul Ryan (R-WI, HAFA 75%), but none of us will know until the morning.

Greta Van Sustren, several people told me, put online that the Secret Service was at Paul Ryan’s home, though the post has subsequently been removed. UPDATE: this is actually what Greta posted. An innocent post that had the potential to be misread.

If it is Ryan, I’ll be quite happy. His departure from Congress would improve both Congress and the Romney campaign. It would improve Congress because too many people tend to lionize him when his record has some flaws. His presence often drowns out competing ideas that may be better and/or more conservative.

His presence on Team Romney would improve Team Romney immensely. Team Romney has, since the primary, had problem making the moral case for freedom and free market. Paul Ryan is articulate and passionate on the issue. Likewise, the GOP, even in polls having Romney behind Obama, often leads on issues of the economy and debt. Those two issues are at the heart of Paul Ryan’s ideas.

He’d be a sound choice. And, mercifully, he would not be an old boring white guy like Portman as veep would be. It wouldn’t be as awesome as Marco Rubio, but then I worry that Rubio’s time has not yet come and picking him could do Rubio more harm than good.

Stay tuned. We’ll see in the morning who it is.

UPDATED: Several press organizations including NBC News are reporting that it is Paul Ryan.

Morning Briefing for August 10, 2012

RedState Morning Briefing

August 10, 2012

Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.

1. The Vice Presidential Stakes

2. U.N.’s Carbon Credits Create Perverse Incentives

3. Things That Threaten Our Children

———————————————————————-

1. The Vice Presidential Stakes

Ten of the last twenty presidents, dating back to 1900, have been forced from office or come close: one was forced to resign (Nixon), one was impeached (Clinton), two were assassinated (Kennedy and McKinley), one was shot (Reagan), one was shot at twice in three weeks (Ford), two died in office of natural causes (FDR and Harding), one was incapacitated by a stroke (Wilson), and one nearly died of a massive heart attack (Eisenhower). If you go back to the 19th century, the record unsurprisingly gets worse. As for vice presidents since 1900, not only have five taken office (Ford, LBJ, Truman, Coolidge and Teddy Roosevelt), but four others have been nominated for the presidency while sitting (George H.W. Bush won, Richard Nixon lost and then won later, and Hubert Humphery and Al Gore lost – with Gore and Nixon losing two of the closest races in history and Humphery losing a tight three-way race), and one other (Walter Mondale) was nominated four years later. Losing vice presidential nominees have mostly not gone on to better things, but a few have – FDR came back to win the presidency 12 years later, Earl Warren became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court five years later, Bob Dole was nominated for the presidency 20 years later, and Lloyd Bentsen moved laterally to become Treasury Secterary five years later. Others, like Sarah Palin and Joe Lieberman, saw their national profiles greatly raised by the experience; Lieberman, Edmund Muskie and John Edwards all ran presidential campaigns four years later, with varying degrees of impact on the race.

All of which is a way of saying that Mitt Romney’s choice of a running mate could have very important repercussions whether or not that choice makes much impact on the outcome of the 2012 election. Romney seems to be a man of unusual health, vigor and personal ethics, and so less likely than most to leave the Oval Office before his term is out if he’s elected, but he’s also 65 years old; things happen. Given that the outcome of the election remains uncertain, we should therefore be rightly concerned with his choice. Let’s take a look at a couple of the considerations on the table, and why I ultimately think Paul Ryan is the best choice under the circumstances.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

2. U.N.’s Carbon Credits Create Perverse Incentives

It seems harmless enough when an airline offers their customers “green indulgences” in the form of carbon credits when buying a ticket. The credits are intended to resolve the guilt the customer is supposed to feel for his wanton use of fossil fuels. In practice, the credits have become a perverse incentive for practices that are exactly opposite what the U.N. intended when it created the system.

It works like this: carbon credits can be traded for cash. You earn one credit for destroying or sequestering a ton of carbon dioxide (CO2). Some other gases have stronger greenhouse effect than CO2, and so are worth more in carbon credits. A ton of methane counts for 21 tons of CO2, nitrous oxide 310. It’s a huge market.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

3. Things That Threaten Our Children

The Left does what it always does and assumes that all problems under the sun are caused by the Iniquitous GOP and their fleet of black helicopters flying missions from a Death Star equipped with E-Coli Rays. It’s always a case where the Konservatives just won’t let government spend money because they want the rich to keep it all buried in Mason jars in Sheldon Anderson’s backyard. The fact that government spending has been almost constantly skyrocketing since 1960 (over the same period of time that young Americans have suffered a tragic reversal of fortunes) is flushed down some Orwellian memory hole.

Please click here for the rest of the post.