AN EDITED VERSION OF THIS POST APPEARS IN THE THE NEW YORK TIMES LETTERS TO THE EDITOR ON AUGUST 14, 2012
("The Romney Package")
It is Romney at his equivocating best.
Paul Ryan is chosen for the VP job because of his "bold" vision on
economic reform, but then Mr. Romney advises that it is his own still
unrevealed plan on which he is running. Like almost everything else in
this universe, there is an absence of definition.
Mr. Romney appeases those extreme voices on the far right by adding
Ryan's name to the ticket. However, Romney is clearly uncomfortable
playing the role of right wing idealogue. It does not suit his
personality or his past politics. And so, Mr. Ryan is given the task
that is seemingly second nature to him.
The putative choice for the Republicans must have felt his campaign
was floundering, and without an injection of someone with big, if very
flawed ideas that his would be an ineffective, defensive and unclear
candidacy. While the choice of Mr. Ryan does not project the same
desperation of Sarah Palin four years ago, it does speak to the concern
within the party that their presidential candidate, on his own accord,
was not strong enough to dethrone the current occupant of the White House.
1 comment:
I think that radical conservatives of the Republican Party chose Ryan for his anti-government beliefs, tragically wrong as they are. They didn't chose Ryan because they thought Romney's campaign is somehow in trouble. Paul Krugman calls this radical faction "Starve the Beasters". They chose him because during tough economic times, anti-government rhetoric is more apt to be listened to. Good ideas get short shrift.
It represents a real opportunity for the President to convince the American people that the issue is not about "too much government", but rather about what good government is. Ryan will hopefully give him his moment. Medicare is good government. The time for soundbites is over. The professor needs to speak.
Post a Comment