TeaPartyWire.com – Tea Party News by and for Tea Party Members

UP OR DOWN

Written by: Nathan W Tucker

Mitt Romney’s choice of Paul Ryan as his vice-presidential running mate, the New York Times tells us, shifts the focus of the presidential election from the economy to ideology.  CNN chimes in, reporting that Ryan makes the election “a clear choice, rather than a referendum on President Obama.”

Not to be outdone, US News proclaims that, “by selecting Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan as his running mate, Republican hopeful Mitt Romney sets up a big-picture presidential debate for the American public about the scope and size of government, the likes of which hasn’t been honestly held since Ronald Reagan’s candidacy.”

Reagan himself, in his famous A Time for Choosing speech on the eve of the 1964 presidential election, aptly described what a “clear choice” election looks like:  “You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right.  Well I’d like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right.  There’s only an up or down—[up] man’s old—old-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism.”

That is what an election about ideology should look like—a choice between statism and liberty, between socialism and freedom.  There can be no middle ground or accommodation between the two; one can only exist at the expense of the other.  Either the state is the servant of the individual, or the individual is the servant of the state.

To offer the American people a clear ideological choice, Republicans should adopt five non-negotiable tenets.  The first is constitutionalism/federalism—the principle that they will not attempt to regulate activity that occurs within a single state.  Centralized power is the single greatest threat to individual liberty, and for that reason the Founders established a constitution of limited, enumerated grants of federal power.

To that end, Republicans should pledge, for instance, to repeal No Child Left Behind and eliminate the Department of Education.  And they should vow that they will not use the interstate commerce clause to regulate non-economic activity, to regulate local economic activity such as agriculture and manufacturing, or to criminalize behavior that occurs entirely within a single state.

Secondly, Republicans should declare that, instead of raising the debt ceiling yet again, they will adopt a plan to initially reduce it to the level of the pre-Reagan years.  In contrast to empty campaign promises about budgets that balance in thirty years and the need to pass a constitutional balanced budget amendment sometime in the distant future, an immovable credit limit such as the debt ceiling serves as a de facto balanced budget amendment that immediately forces Congress to live within its means.

Third, Republicans should commit themselves to the maintenance of universal justice by guaranteeing the equal protection “of all persons, all products of labor, all property, all rights, all interests.”  They should stop engaging in class warfare by arguing that we need to strengthen the middle class and make the rich pay more in taxes.

Freedom is class neutral and is wholly incompatible with the sacrifice of some for the good of others.  The Republican Party should pledge to enact a tax code that treats everyone the same by eliminating the current progressive tax code with all its loopholes, thereby cutting everyone’s taxes in half.

Additionally, Republicans should introduce a plan to eliminate all forms of legal plunder—the use of “the law to take from one person what belongs to them, and giving it to others to whom it does not belong.”  The taxation of A to give to B is not freedom but slavery.

Fourth, Republicans should vow to create a wall of separation between the economy and the state in which the government will not seek to, directly or indirectly, intervene, manipulate, or otherwise control the economy.  Such government planning only slows economic growth by subsidizing some consumers and producers at the expense of others.

Fifth and finally, Republicans should declare that regulations be made by the most local form of government feasible by using the least restrictive means available in which the benefits outweigh the costs.  Additionally, Republicans should require that all bureaucratic regulations be approved by the legislature before they take effect.

In the absence of these planks, the upcoming election can hardly be called a clear choice between the “ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order” or “the ant heap of totalitarianism.”

FNC graphic, based on 2013 budget figures and generated by Excel

Posted: Aug. 14th, 2012

Here are a few little-known facts about Paul Ryan’s supposedly slash-and-burn budget plan.

• Government spending increases almost every year over the next decade.
• Tax and other revenue rises year after year.
• The 10-year deficit is still $3 trillion.

The fact that Ryan’s spending plans grow the federal budget over the long term is one that could easily be lost in the political melee underway in the wake of his selection as Mitt Romney’s running mate.

To be sure, Ryan is proposing major changes to Medicare and taxation that Democrats see as problematic.

But claims that Ryan is slashing spending don’t quite square with the numbers. Those claims are convenient Washington shorthand for what Ryan’s plan actually proposes — which is to slow the rate of budget growth, but still allow the budget to grow.

Under the latest Ryan plan, the budget would grow from $3.6 trillion this year to $4.9 trillion in 2022. The only years in which spending would dip are 2013 and 2014.

Under President Obama’s 2013 budget, spending also increases over the 10-year period, but by a much bigger amount. The budget grows from $3.8 trillion in 2012 to $5.8 trillion in 2022. And instead of the $3.1 trillion long-term deficit under Ryan’s plan, Obama’s plan comes with a $6.7 trillion deficit.

That’s the money that would be added to the national debt over that period.

There is one measure by which Ryan is shrinking the budget. Over the next 10 years, it proposes to shrink government spending “as a share of the economy” from roughly 23 percent to about 20 percent.

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan at Randolph-Macon College in Ashland, Va., Aug. 11.

His running mate offers Romney the opportunity to explain to Americans that they have a choice between national stagnation and renewal.

By: Kimberley Strassel

Posted: Aug. 12th, 2012

Mitt Romney did much more this weekend than announce a running mate. He unveiled a significant change in strategy. The 2012 election is now a choice, not just a referendum.

Conservatives have spent much of this summer reassuring themselves. They’ve pointed out the extraordinary sums President Obama has thrown at crippling Mr. Romney. They’ve noted how ugly and brutal those attacks have been. They’ve comforted themselves that, for all the smears, Mr. Romney is within a few points of the incumbent in national tracking polls.

Yet the same can be said on the other side. The economy is teetering, the deficit exploding, the nation unhappy with his signature legislation. Daily, Mr. Romney beats the White House with these failures. But he has barely moved the polling dial.

Mr. Romney’s choice of House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan, one of the party’s star reformers, is an attempt to break out of the stalemate, change the dynamic. It was foremost a shrewd acknowledgment on Mr. Romney’s part that his path to the White House is going to take more than pointing out the obvious. He needs to run on bold ideas, as Mr. Ryan has, and convince Americans those ideas are the way to prosperity.

In fairness, the Romney campaign had the elements in place. It’s taken some time, but Mr. Romney today is sporting a fairly bold reform agenda, from his tax cuts to his Medicare reforms, to his vow to end ObamaCare. And the candidate has been dutifully repeating that this election is a choice between two very different futures for the country. Yet his policy and his words were largely lost amid his campaign’s intense focus on the president.

Mr. Ryan provides the crucial shift in emphasis, the opportunity to go on offense. We will now have a focus on, and explanation of, the choice between stagnation and renewal. This is what Mr. Ryan excels at—not just crafting ideas, but explaining them in a positive and serious way. This ability is why the congressman—despite his supposedly extremist reform blueprint and budget (says the left)—has continued to win a district that in 2008 went for Mr. Obama.

Read More:

@SarahPalinUSA  Congratulations to Mitt Romney on his choice of Congressman Paul Ryan as his running mate. President Obama has… fb.me/1wu4EKVBe

As this is being written, sources inside the Romney for President campaign are reporting that in a few hours, the former Governor will announce that, Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan is Romney’s choice for his Vice Presidential running mate. Congressman Ryan is a 42 year old, father of three and is widely regarded as a fiscal conservative. Congressman Ryan has cancelled his vacation to be on the deck on the deck of the U.S.S. Wisconsin with Romney on Saturday morning in Virginia. Afterward the campaign will begin a tour together campaigning.

Sarah Palin speaks to a crowd of about 1,000 Ted Cruz supporters on Friday in The Woodlands, Texas. The former Alaska governor and 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee addressed more than 1,000 sweating, enthusiastic supporters of tea party favorite and Republican U.S. Senate candidate Ted Cruz. (Credit: Johnny Hanson/AP -)

By Ellen Nakashima

Posted: July 29th, 2012

Former vice president Richard B. Cheney said the selection of Sarah Palin as the Republican vice presidential candidate in 2008 was “a mistake” — the sort of mistake Mitt Romney should avoid.

In an interview with ABC News, Cheney said Sen. John McCain’s choice of the relatively inexperienced Palin was one “I don’t think was well handled.”

In choosing a running mate, Cheney said, “there are two lists. There is the big list. And it’s got a lot of folks on it.”

To make the smaller list, he said, “the test . . . has to be, ‘Is this person capable of being president of the United States?’ ”

Putting electoral considerations over qualifications is not wise, Cheney told ABC’s Jon Karl in an interview from Cheney’s ranch in Jackson Hole, Wyo., to be aired Monday on ABC news programs and on “Nightline.”

“Those are important issues, but they should never be allowed to override that first proposition. That was one of the problems McCain had,” Cheney said.

“I like Governor Palin,” Cheney said of the former Alaska governor. “I’ve met her. I know her. . . . Attractive candidate. But based on her background, she’d only been governor for, what, two years. I don’t think she passed that test . . . of being ready to take over. And I think that was a mistake.”

Cheney, who is recovering from heart transplant surgery in March, is an old hand at vetting vice-presidential aspirants. He helped Gerald R. Ford and George W. Bush in their searches. He then became Bush’s vice president, serving two terms.

Four years ago, Romney lost out to Palin in the veepstakes. This year Palin, who flirted with a 2012 presidential run, is not believed to be under consideration as a potential running mate. She has not responded to Cheney’s comments.

Read More: WashingtonPost.com

Posted: June 26th, 2012

(CBS News) Condoleezza Rice is not interested in being Mitt Romney’s running mate.

In an interview with “CBS This Morning,” the former secretary of state said, “There is no way that I will do this,” when asked if she would accept a position as the No. 2 on this year’s Republican presidential ticket.

“Charlie, I didn’t run for student council president. I don’t see myself in any way in elected office. I love policy. I’m not particularly fond of politics,” she told host Charlie Rose, adding that she thinks Romney has “terrific judgment.”

Pressed on whether she would turn it down if asked, she said, “I’m saying there is no way that I will do this, because it’s really not me. I know my strengths, and governor Romney needs to find someone who wants to run with him.”

“There are many people who will do it very, very well, and I’ll support the ticket,” she said.

Rice spoke over the weekend at a Utah retreat of big Republican donors for Romney and her remarks were widely praised by attendees.

“I talked about the need for American leadership, I talked about the importance of the United States to a more peaceful world, a world that has been quite turbulent in recent years, and needs a strong American anchor,” she said.

Read More: CBSNews.com

Governor Scott Walker

Will Romney Choose a Moderate or Safe Running Mate for VP?

By: Rachel Alexander

Posted: June 5th,2012

There are rumors that Mitt Romney may select his vice-presidential running mate in advance of the Republican National Convention in August. Speeding up the process would boost his fundraising for a few extra weeks. Conservatives are worried Romney will pick a moderate establishment candidate, while the establishment is worried Romney will pick someone seen as too extreme by the independents who generally decide presidential elections.

Romney will most likely avoid making the kind of choice John McCain did by picking Sarah Palin. Although Palin energized the base, she became a relentless target of the media. He will not want to choose a candidate who will eclipse him, which eliminates someone like New Jersey Governor Chris Christie. He needs a running mate that the base finds acceptable, if not exciting, in order to counter his lackluster reputation with conservatives. Someone from a swing state with many electoral votes will get top consideration. Another important, but not mandatory, criterion is fundraising ability of a running mate, which means they cannot be an unknown.

A source from last week’s 2012 Bilderberg Conference leaked out that the ultra secretive, powerful organization composed of the biggest names in politics and finance has selected Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels to be Romney’s running mate. While considered a very safe pick, Daniels is such a low-key figure he may not bring much to the ticket.

A running mate that would energize the base is Paul Ryan (R-WI). Wisconsin is a swing state, and Walker has become a recognized champion of cutting fiscal waste. The conservative grassroots likes him and his good looks don’t hurt.

Another likely VP pick is Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker. Obama will not campaign for Walker’s opponent, realizing how popular Walker is. Obama currently leads Romney in Wisconsin by eight points among likely voters and does not want to rock the boat. Walker is leading his recall challenger by the same margin. Walker has become a hero to the grassroots and Tea Party for taking on public employee unions. If Romney picks Walker after surviving a recall election, it would rally the conservative base, something Romney needs.

At first glance, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) seems a natural choice, since Rubio is Hispanic and Florida is a swing state with 29 electoral votes. However, a poll taken by Public Policy Polling in April found that Rubio actually hurts Romney’s chances in Florida. In addition, the GOP base has become skeptical of Rubio’s conservative credentials. The same poll found that putting former Florida Governor Jeb Bush on the ticket would help Romney in Florida, but Bush has firmly stated he is not interested in the position. Although he has generally been the favorite Bush of most Republicans, the dynasty has probably run its course. Both former presidents Bush have become associated with big government, and with W. sharing blame for the recession and bailouts, another Bush on the ticket could make it difficult to distinguish Obama’s failed fiscal policies from Romney.

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is popular with a significant portion of the Republican Party, but he would make the slate an all Northeastern ticket. Some conservatives are skeptical of how conservative the New Jersey Republican really is. He is also a larger than life personality that would likely overshadow Romney.

Tim Pawlenty would be a safe choice; while Republicans do not get excited about him, they do not dislike him either. Condoleeza Rice only endorsed Romney last week, evidence that she is telling the truth when she says she has no interest in being vice president.

Last month, National Journal selected Rob Senator Portman (R-OH) as Romney’s most likely VP pick. Although Ohio is a key battleground state with 18 electoral votes, Portman is too unknown to be a realistic choice.

Romney met informally with Rand Paul (R-KY) last week, sparking rumors that he was being considered. However, Paul is too closely associated with his father Ron Paul (R-TX) and his polarizing views on foreign policy. While the junior Paul is not as divisive as his father, he may not be able to escape the negative energy that the senior Paul’s supporters have created around him.

The dark horse pick is New Mexico governor Susana Martinez. Last week she came out even more strongly than Romney on illegal immigration, questioning the effectiveness of self-deportation. New Mexico is considered a swing state, and choosing Martinez would put both a minority and a woman on the ticket. Based on the fact she is a relatively new governor, though, she may be considered too similar to Palin.

Romney is a predictably savvy, calculating, political candidate. He will choose a safe running mate for vice president. The conservative base would love to see him pick someone like Rep. Allen West (R-FL), but Allen would be too much of a lightening rod for the liberal media. Romney chose a moderate Republican from Utah, former Governor Mike Leavitt, to head his transition team. Leavitt will most likely urge Romney to go with someone safe, not flashy. My money is on Governor Walker, followed by Rep. Ryan.