The Choice

Posted on by

Ralph Nader must be slowing down. He hasn’t yet issued an open letter declaring there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between the two tickets. Give him another 72 hours.

Of course, there really is a huge difference between the two tickets. Let’s hope voters notice before November.

Jonathan Chait writes that Paul Ryan’s placement on the ticket signals that “movement conservatism” now is in complete control of the Republican Party. It feels as if they’ve been in control for the past 30 years. However,

What makes Ryan so extraordinary is that he is not just a handsome slickster skilled at conveying sincerity with a winsome heartland affect. Pols like that come along every year. He is also (as Rich Yeselson put it) the chief party theoretician. Far more than even Ronald Reagan, he is deeply grounded is the ideological precepts of the conservative movement — a longtime Ayn Rand devotee who imbibed deeply from the lunatic supply-side tracts of Jude Wanniski and George Gilder. He has not merely formed an alliance with the movement, he is a product of it.

In this sense, Ryan’s nomination represents an important historical marker and the completion of a 50-year struggle. Starting in the early sixties, conservative activists set out to seize control of the Republican Party. At the time the party was firmly in the hands of Establishmentarians who had made their peace with the New Deal, but the activists regarded the entire development of the modern regulatory and welfare states as a horrific assault on freedom bound to lead to imminent societal collapse. In fits and starts, the conservatives slowly advanced – nominating Goldwater, retreating under Nixon, nominating Reagan, retreating as Reagan sought to govern, and on and on through Gingrich, Bush, and his successors.

Over time the movement and the party have grown synonymous, and Ryan’s nominations represents a moment when the conservative movement ceased to control the politicians from behind the scenes and openly assumed the mantle of power.

Romney, meanwhile, is still pretending to be his own man and says he will not run on Mr. Ryan’s infamous budget, but will produce his own budget. Don’t hold your breath waiting for details until you enjoy passing out. It’s plain that, if elected, Mittens will be hostage to the Ryan Republicans. And we’ll all be screwed.

6 thoughts on “The Choice”

  1. The minute Reagan invited the Evangelicals into politics, was the moment when that party started to turn crazy.

    The Republican Party, throughout the 80’s and early 90’s began to absorb on the Evangelical’s Manichean view.

    And, I think George H.W. Bush’s loss in 1992 was the first sign of how much the party really had changed.
    Now, Ross Perot had something to do with the loss, but I think the fact that Bush had the audacity to raise taxes after making a pledge not to, was taken as an apostasy.

    The rest is, as they say, history.

    And the past 20 years have seen the Republican Party get rid of any and every one who is not a true believer in the (Conservative/Christian) faith.

    And right now, even as Mitt’s trying to run around, acting like he’s the boss, it’s Ryan who’s in “The Catbird Seat.”

    If he helps Mitt win, he’s the hero.
    He’ll also be a check on Mitt, lest Mitt be less than a “HE-MAN Woman & Brown People Hating” Conservative.
    If Mitt flounders with the base, he’ll be told before 2016 to make some bullsh*t excuse about his family, and having to step down, and then “Privatizing” Ryan will be their candidate in 2016.
    If Mitt plays along, then Ryan’s their choice in 2020.

    If Mitt loses, it’ll be Mitt’s fault for being insufficiently Conservative, Ryan will be held blameless, and he becomes their “It Boy!” in 2016.

    And if Ryan loses in either 2016 or 2020, it’ll be because Ryan, that RINO, was insufficiently Conservative enough.

    Conservatism never fails.
    It can only be failed.

    So, you bet that if Mitt wins, not only will he make sure his fingers can grip the pen to sign the legislation coming from a Republican House and Senate, but when he’s asked by the Republican powers that be to pull down his magic underwear and spread his cheeks, he’ll ask “Is that far enough for you, or do you want it wider?”

    From within, or without, this nation’s future depends on the destruction of the Republican Party as it’s presently constituted.
    “I want my old Republicans back!!!”

  2. It’s almost as if Ron Paul-mania took all the attention away from Nader. I would like to see the two of them debate one day, just to see what happens if matter and antimatter collide.

  4. Budgetary matters can be passed on a simple majority – the most dangerous elements of the Ryan plan are immune to the filibuster. This is how Bush got the original tax cuts past the Democrats. The liberal idiots opposed to Obama who will sit out this election are flirting with disaster. The Senate mix this election is not favorable – whether the predicted GOP losses in the House could result in a democratic majority is an open question.

    The big money guys that are simpatico with Ryan will spend unlimited – I mean hundreds of millions more than is committed – if the ‘deal’ between Ryan and Romney means their guy Ryan can call the economic shots on the budget.

Comments are closed.