The liberal assault on Paul Ryan has commenced. But the first round of attacks can’t provide much solace to Democrats, who assume they will be able to demonize the Republican vice presidential candidate with ease. The first 48 hours of Ryan’s candidacy has already seen a deluge of abuse from the mainstream media editorial pages and columnists. If all you read is the opinion pages of the New York Times, which trotted out its second editorial rant against Ryan in two days, then you probably think that political strategist turned pundit Robert Shrum’s boast in the Daily Beast that by the time the Obama campaign is through with him, Ryan will be as toxic as Sarah Palin. Liberals like Robert Reich, who took to the Huffington Post to howl that Ryan’s ideas are “social Darwinism” or former Times editor Bill Keller who damned the prospective next GOP administration as a compendium of every wicked conservative idea ever conceived, clearly believe all they need to do is to just call Ryan and to a lesser extent Romney, every name they can think of.
But the problem with this effort to Palin-ize Ryan is that the first returns show it probably won’t work.
One piece of evidence is the full length front-page profile of Ryan published in today’s Times. The story it tells of a small town boy whose intellectual prowess is matched only by his work ethic is not one that easily lends itself to the “extremist” narrative that the paper’s editorial page has been screaming about since Saturday. But the authors do their best to skew the portrait with language that doesn’t belong on the news pages of a reputable newspaper.
Part of the problem is that the Times can’t seem to find anyone who knows the likable congressman to dish any non-existent dirt on him. For example, in describing Ryan as an ambitious and accomplished teenager with numerous activities to his credit, the Times stoops to describe him as a “politically astute suck up.” No, that’s not a quote from some teenage rival but an editorial comment inserted into the article by the authors without quotes or even an attempt to attribute this opinion to anyone who knew him.
The article describes Ryan’s college career by again using a pejorative without quotes in which it characterizes his economic philosophy as “trickle down economics.” One can disagree with Ryan’s belief in the importance of economic freedom and the importance of encouraging the creation of wealth rather than expecting it to emerge as a result of some miraculous government intervention, but to use that kind of language again shows liberal reporters are trying a little too hard to follow their paper’s editorial party line in descriptions of the candidate.
Reality again collided with ideology last night on “60 Minutes.” The CBS program got the first post-announcement interview with Romney and Ryan last night, and there’s little doubt that liberals tuning into the program were hoping the Ryan roll-out would conjure up memories of how Sarah Palin was felled in her first network interviews after John McCain tapped her to be his vice presidential nominee. But Bob Schieffer never laid a glove on either Romney or Ryan. Much of the interview was softball material, but even when Schieffer attempted to attack the duo on the Ryan budget plan or entitlement reform, they easily turned away the assault and honed in on the president’s failings and the need to have the country face up to the tough issue of entitlement reform. Just as important, unlike Katie Couric’s confidence that she could embarrass Palin in 2008, Schieffer knew better than to try to tangle with the formidable Ryan.
While we can expect the assault on Ryan to only intensify in the coming days, liberals are already starting to show some frustration as they come up against the fact that whatever you may think of his ideas, he is both likable and admirable, something even President Obama was willing to admit earlier in his administration when he hoped to co-opt the intellectual leader of House Republicans.
Moreover, unlike Palin, Ryan is clearly ready to not merely hold his own on the enemy turf of the mainstream media but, as President Obama learned to his sorrow, is able to go on the offensive and challenge liberal orthodoxies without appearing like the snarling cartoon character that Democrats hope to paint to the public.
As I wrote earlier, it is an open question as to whether the American public will be willing to choose Ryan’s ideas about reforming our out-of-control tax and spend cycle over Democrat demagoguery intended to defend the status quo. But whatever the outcome of the election, the liberal boasts about turning Ryan into another Palin will fail miserably.
The team must get on the offensive right away and must not allow BHO to set the message each day.Ryan is an excellent choice. The MSM are destroying this country (along with BHO) with their bias. It's a total shame they do not care about the American people.
Interesting that you would characterize an editorial questioning the practicality and humanity of Rep. Ryan's budget plan as a "rant." Mitt Romney's budget plans are at best, vague. Cut taxes, close the loopholes, boost defense spending, etc. – but no real numbers and Ryan's plan seems like it was meant more as a conversation starter than an actual blue print. nConstructing a false comparison to Gov. Palin does not help your case. Palin was a know-nothing and proud of it. With Ryan, it's a case of people disagreeing about the future. That's an important discussion to have and should not be labeled "demonizing,," just to save you the work of getting into the details.
Gov. Palin was "never a know nothing and proud of it" and PJ104 is himself a pathetic lightweight to still pile onto it four years down the pike. Palin's speech to the Rethug convention was genuinely electrifying –the only such rhetoric in the otherwise deadly campaign– and her main point then, that she was both unimpressed and unintimidated by the self-proclaimed elite pooh-bahs, was right-on! Small wonder they shat all over her.
If Ryan's Budgetary razor cuts out all the crapola pork that's one (good) thing-but Social Security and Medicare aren't unnecessary.If Ryan leaps on the third rail,holding the Voucher flag on high,he'll ensure Romney's defeat.Saul Bellow once complained that that the modern world was compelling everyone to run their personal lives as if they were businesses,thus robbing citizens of the time and peace of mind to pursue loftier matters.The fear is that over-zealous Ryanites would have us all practice "Extreme Accounting"……….
First a little fussing: n nThe words are "home in" not hone in. Pilots used to home in on radio beacons before VOR and later GPS did away with such things. Hone is delicately removing metal to make two parts fit precisely as in car engine wrist bearings. One hones (perfects) an idea and homes in (come through the fog of extraneous ideas) on a key point. n nThat said, the writer has done an admirable job of reaching the right conclusion at the earlier time it could be verified (he homed in).
There is nothing about Ryan that needs "demonization"—he already is demon enough for the swing voters. nSeniors do not take it lightly when u speak evil of medicare or social security. the unemployed r not willing to wait till the dough u give the rich trickles down to them nWhen times r hard, austerity, and Ayn Rand, do not seem so appealing.
See what happens when you tell those seniors about Obama's plan to cut 700 billion in medicare spending. All Ryan has to do is tell the truth about what Obama has in store for them. As Maggie Thatcher said the problem with socialism is you will run out other people's money. That's Obama to a fault.
Really Lamey? Then why is it that all of the polling of senior citizens on Paul Ryan comes back with huge approval numbers? Ryan has the approval of over 56% of those over 55 and has the "strong approval" of that group by something like 30%, higher percentages than any, other candidate, Dem or Pub. n nWhat Ryan has consistently said is that the current system can stay in place for those 55 and older, but has to be reformed for those who are younger or it won't be there at all. And he backs it up with hard numbers from the CBO.
Are you Lying on Purpose or are you simply unknowing and Stupid ? !!!!!!!!!! nObama cut $ 700.000.00 from Medicare and has added 23 new taxes . nPlus a Home sale at 3.8 % In Obama care and a death tax at 55 % as of 2013 . nRyan bill said No one over 55 Health would have to change Insurance plans and you could keep their ""Same Insurance coverage " . nHis plan balances the budget after 10 years . nSimilar to the plan of that none bias economic committee Obama put together and then paid no attention too nor has he given us a Budget in 1,517 days required by law once a year .
Yah but this guy is hardly metrosexual, he's a deer hunter.
The louder Commentary screams, the more I know the right wing extremists are in trouble. Throw a stone at a pack of dogs, and the one that howls is the one that was hit — and Commentary is really howling now.
I'd say it looks like the left that is worried. The hysterical thread of comments above, by commenters who are obviouosly not regular commentary readers, is highly suspect.
The only reason Sarah Palin was "Palinized" was because clowns like you, Tobin, and the rest of the GOP Establishment losers stood by and allowed it to happen. n nI like Paul Ryan, but he is no Sarah Palin. Not in skill, not in Accomplishments. n nPalin has a great back story too. Grew up in a log cabin, literally, in the Alaska wilderness. Chopped wood daily for heat. n nPaid her own way through school, has a degree in journalism and communications. n nAs Mayor of Wasilla took a dirt road village and turned it into the fastest growing city in the state. Built roads and infrastructure while at the same time lowering taxes. Palin created a business friendly city that is the trading hub for the entire Mat-Su Valley, an area roughly the size of the state of Delaware. The current Mayor credits Palin for the almost 50,000 people a day who shop there. n nAs the state's top oil and gas regulator Palin took on corruption in government, and in the relationship between government and Big Oil. It was from that powerful position that she uncovered massive corruption within the Republican Party. n nWhen she was done, the state GOP chair and the Attorney General were finished. Then she took down the sitting Republican Governor in a landslide. n nPalin was the most popular governor in the country with approval ratings in the 90s. She was the most fiscally responsible Governor in the country, slashing wasteful spending, while still improving the state. n nShe took on Big Oil and reformed the corrupt relationship between lawmakers and oil executives. She changed the way Big Oil would purchase crude oil from the Alaskan people, who by constitutional writ, own all of the oil and gas under the ground. Corrupt politicians taking payoffs had allowed Big Oil to screw Alaska out of billions of dollars. n nShe also created the largest infrastructure project in North American history, something others had tried to do for 30 years. It took her two. n nAgain, had you worthless Republican hacks stood with Governor Palin, instead of joining in with the liberal filth that attacked her, we wouldn't have the word "palinized" to throw around. n nEstablishment Republicans are part of the problem, not the solution. n nPaul Ryan is a good guy, but he's got a long way to go before he's worthy of comparison to Sarah Palin.
Well you have to understand that for all their alleged "conservatism" people like Mr Tobin, deep-down yearn for approval and acceptance by the MSM "mainstream". Ryan cannot be "Palin-ized", but Tobin sure can be (Andrea) Mitchell-ized. Pathetic, really.
Plus the failure to acknowledge that, hate her of not, Palin played a major role in nturing the Tea Party movement into a considerable force. She could not be its candidate for the Republican nomination because of the opposition of the Establishment. Apparently, when she was on the cusp on jumping into the fray, she realized how stacked the deck was in favor of Mitt. Her efforts to support alternatives probably showed her how right she was not to get in. She would have been assaulted as McCain was in 2000 and as Newt was after his showing in Iowa and South Carolina. But it is at least arguable that were Ryan not supported by the party members in the House, and established himself as someone congenial to that faction, that Romney might indeed have turned to other, able but bland Midwesterners, or Rubio–Jeb’s protege.