RNC 2012: Ryan finishes off a powerful second night
TAMPA — Wednesday night at the Republican National Convention was drifting along unremarkably for a couple of hours. For Georgians, even Attorney General Sam Olens’ speech — the only one this week by someone from our state — suffered from his pairing with his Floridian counterpart, Pam Bondi; the tag-team format just didn’t work all that well. Speeches from Sen. John Thune, the South Dakotan whose name was bandied about (inexplicably, I’d say tonight) as a potential presidential candidate, and Sen. John McCain, the 2008 nominee, were flat.
Then came the wave.
It started with Mike Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor and 2008 presidential candidate. To be honest, I wasn’t able to catch much of his speech, but I could tell that the crowd responded to it with much more energy than any of the earlier speakers generated.
Then came Condoleezza Rice. The former secretary of state is highly regarded for her intellect and experience, but I don’t know anyone who expected a set-piece speech from her like the one she gave tonight. She’s obviously known as a foreign-policy expert, but her topics ran the gamut: immigration, education and school choice (which Rice, who grew up in Jim Crow Birmingham, called “the civil rights issue of our day”), and the federal debt. She was powerful on the moral aspects of American leadership in the world and the threat that our finances pose to our ability to exercise it: “There is no country, not even a rising China, that can do more harm to us than we can do to ourselves if we do not do the hard work at home.” She was firm in speaking against the “narrative of grievance and entitlement,” which she described as alien to America. She was wholly impressive and utterly convincing as a future politician (though she’s served in government, she’s never run for office).
New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez followed Rice and, having never heard her speak before, I wasn’t sure about the wisdom of putting her between such a powerful speech by Rice and the night’s headliner, Paul Ryan. But Martinez was very impressive. She spoke of her upbringing in a family with its own small security business — and of working, at age 18, as an armed guard for it. She had one of the lines of the night, describing her surprised reaction after she and her husband met with Republicans trying to convince her to switch to their party years ago: “I’ll be damned. We’re Republicans!”
But Ryan, of course, was every bit the closer the GOP wanted this night. He took on President Obama directly and forcefully, as the vice presidential nominee traditionally is expected to do. He spoke of wasted stimulus money that went to companies “like Solyndra, with their gold-plated connections, subsidized jobs and make-believe markets.” He welcomed the confrontation with Democrats over Medicare: “Our nation needs this debate, we [Romney and Ryan] want this debate, and we will win this debate.” He described the Obama campaign as “a ship trying to sail on yesterday’s wind.”
He defined himself as the youthful candidate on the ticket and in the race, playfully comparing Romney’s songs, which he’s heard “on the campaign bus and in many hotel elevators” with his own playlist, which “starts with AC/DC and ends with Zeppelin.” But more importantly, he made a play for young voters with the line of the convention, maybe the campaign, so far: “College graduates should not have to live out their 20s in their childhood bedrooms, staring up at fading Obama posters and wondering when they can move out and get going with life.”
Two nights in, this campaign is taking a shape that it sorely lacked before Ryan joined the ticket and, to some degree, even until this week. It will be interesting to see not only how Romney closes it out Thursday, but how the Democrats react in Charlotte next week.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
318 comments Add your comment
Dusty
August 30th, 2012
7:13 pm
Mark V
I care about the health of all people. That’s why I have given aid in that struggle in my professional life, much of it with the underpriveleged.
If you want to ignore the fact that bankrupting the country for any reason is detrimental to all citizens, go ahead.
ObamaCare barely scraped through Congress.because it is so flawed. It may have some greatness but is a poor vehicle to deliver healthcare.
Another thing you don’t seem to realize is that there will always be poor people and many will be sick. That will not go away with any health system. The USA has excellent heathcare, much of it available to the poor. It will not be excellent for anyone with ObamaCare and you need not expect otherwise no matter what happens to Medicare.
So Much For Your LEFTWING WaPO Fact Checker
August 30th, 2012
7:29 pm
Wash Post Fact Checker Glenn Kessler: ‘I Prefer to Stick with non-WaPo Content’
We heard back from Glenn Kessler, the columnist for the Washington Post’s Fact Checker.
Kessler was recently awash in controversy. He commented about, but did not fact check — a recent Washington Post report, “Romney’s Bain Capital Invested in Companies that Moved Jobs Overseas,” that Barack Obama and Mitt Romney’s political campaigns twisted differently both to their own advantages.
Kessler ventured to write that the two campaigns mis-used the report, but his column attracted attention because he stated that despite having a column that fact checks, he wouldn’t fact check the Post’s article itself. His column’s comment that “The Fact Checker does not check the facts in the reporting of Washington Post writers or columnists, despite the many pleas of readers to do so” stood out and was galling to many readers as the comments showed.
As iMediaEthics noted in a previous report, Kessler’s description of his column limits his fact checking jurisdiction only to “statements by politicians and political advocacy groups.”
So iMediaEthics asked Kessler by email why he didn’t just go ahead and check the Post’s reporting as it seems to fully qualify under the description. We also asked why he did not just refer the issue to the newspaper’s ombudsman or skip saying anything on the issue.
Kessler answered our email:
“I can’t really be in the position of verifying what my colleagues have reported. That’s not my role. The Ombudsman is specifically tasked with looking into concerns about reporting practices at the Post.”
He went further and indicated that his editors told him to comment about the issue (”The newspaper believed it would be useful to address what was a flawed interpretation of the article’s conclusions”) and that they did not appreciate that “the article was being used in a campaign ad that distorted its meaning.”
http://www.imediaethics.org/News/3233/Wash_post_fact_checker_glenn_kessler__i_prefer_to_stick_with_non-wapo_content.php
MarkV
August 30th, 2012
7:43 pm
Dusty @7:13 pm
Dusty,
I believe you care about health of all people, but I also believe you have a false idea about the real situation for many poor people, in spite of your professional experience. And I just do not believe that ObamaCare will or would bankrupt the country. As any law it can be improved, but it a step toward insuring everybody, which the Republicans seem unwilling to do, and which I think is essential.
As for you last paragraph, I realize very well there will be poor people and many will be sick, but I also know there are countries that are solving this problem much better than we do.
They BOTH suck
August 30th, 2012
8:14 pm
@@
When I responded Dusty; I meant what I said and said what I meant.
She is the last one to say anything about others crying, griping or whatever.
But you are welcome to cry about it as well.
@@
August 30th, 2012
8:30 pm
TBs:
Not crying. It tends to impair my vision, then I can’t see what others would prefer I not.
They BOTH suck
August 30th, 2012
8:39 pm
@@
Kool and the gang
Dusty
August 30th, 2012
9:04 pm
Dear MarkV
Perhaps you are correct that I don’t know “the real situation” for many poor people. After all, I’ve only worked with them in Arizona, South Dakota, Alabama and Atlanta, Georgia which limits my exposure. Perhaps you would likie to tell me your experience working with the poor?
If the USA does not have the best healthcare for the poor, there certainly are a myriad of them trying to get here. Need I mention Mexico and Central America?
Smaller prosperous or less populated countries like Germany and Canada have developed over all systems along with tax rates close to 50% to cover it.. The largest countries like Russia and China are communist run and I don’t have to explain that.
While there may be valid reasons for a socialistic health system I have long been exposed to the best system in the world and don’t care to exchange it for something mediocre and expensive..
They BOTH suck
August 30th, 2012
9:16 pm
Russia
Russian is communist? When did they go back to that system?
Dusty
August 30th, 2012
9:29 pm
The Russian Healthcare system was established under communist rule.
The Russians may have dumped the communists but they kept the healthcare system.
They BOTH suck
August 30th, 2012
9:30 pm
Thanks for the clarification.
Is it the same system or some hybrid of what they had under communist rule?
Dusty
August 30th, 2012
10:07 pm
They BOTH Suck 9:30
Russians have been trying to reform their healthcare system. The problems come from what has been described as an “accepted model of state-paternalistic social system”. Citizens who are now complaining about its poor execution and poor results, still can’t accept any changes from the old system..
You should read the Rand report “Crisis of Russian Health Care”. It is scary. Some of the health care “mottos” were “We will take care of you all your life’ but the care was so poor (even with plentiful docs & advantages) that it was run without any influence from citizens with desire for improvement. For medics, it was just a government job.
All this sounds a lot like what I’m hearing about ObamaCare,i.e.” it is going to take care of me always”, etc.etc. etc. They do not realize some of the downfalls or the expense that go with such a system.
MarkV
August 30th, 2012
10:56 pm
Dusty @9:04 pm
Dusty,
I am sorry, but whenever you are pressed, you come up with some really amazing arguments.
”If the USA does not have the best healthcare for the poor, there certainly are a myriad of them trying to get here. Need I mention Mexico and Central America?”
Are trying to say that the people from Mexico and Central America are coming here for the health care? And are you putting them as examples of countries with health care which I have mentioned?
I will assure, you, whether you believe it or not, that there are countries with really good health care and their people are not coming here to be treated – except for a few rich people, who want to have the best medical technology, which is what US has the best one. And their people would never exchange their system for ours. It is quite ridiculous to talk here about communist countries or former communist countries. I have never mentioned Russia as a country we should emulate in anything.
As for Canada and Germany, their overall tax burdens are about 32.3 for Canada and 36.4% for Germany, a far cry from your 50%.
In the end, I am asking you the question I asked you before and you never answered: If countries much less rich than the U S can afford to insure all their citizens, why cannot we, the richest country in the world?
MarkV
August 30th, 2012
11:54 pm
Dear Dusty,
You may have a different view, but I wish we could discuss this subject under better conditions, than late at night and in the middle of other issues.
One thing I would ask you, if we could do that, would be how you define “the best health care system,” other than that it is your opinion.
I would also try to make you understand the distinction between universal health care and a “socialist health system.” In the latter the health care is socialized, which means that the providers are government employees. I think very few people in their country advocate that, and most certainly I do not. But the requirement of health care insurance for everybody (or most everybody, with exceptions, as in a few countries) is not socialized medicine. It can be based on compulsory private insurance (Switzerland), or as government insurance (Medicare for everybody, single payer system). The advantages and disadvantages of those variation can always be debated, but there is no way, in my opinion, to justify our system before the ObamaCare attempt. And the main point is, the health care in those countries with the best universal health coverage is neither mediocre nor expensive. As has been well documented, the US has by far the most expensive health care of all developed countries, with results that in no way justify that expense.
Dusty
August 31st, 2012
10:57 am
MarkV
Can’t spend too much time here today as I’m not only preparing for a big birthday party, I also have out of town company coming. But please consider your own posts which rebut some of your own arguments. Such as:
Rich people from other countries come to the USA for the best medical treatment. (US is now the best!)
Other countries with universal healthcare do not have higher taxes. (Taxes on personal income over $56,491 in the Netherlands is 52%! 52%!!!!! Yes, they have healthcare for everybody.
Does COMPULSORY medical insurance sound like freedom to you? It doesn’t to me. The government is demanding that you follow their decisions for your PERSONAL healthcare. What else are they doing to DECIDE for us?
You may overlook all this if you like. I can’t ignore the loss of freedom that comes with ObamaCare and any other such system that gives me and others a loss of personal decisions in personal life.I don’t want my taxes raised either for more government control when they have already raised the national debt to astronomical figures. That debt is not going away when the government adds more to it every day. There is no way possible to add universal heathcare without adding to that debt.
One other point about illegal immigrants.They do not come here for healthcare alone but they use what is here when they come. (In 2008, 4.3 million babies were born to illegal immigrants in the USA. )
Good to hear from you.
MarkV
August 31st, 2012
11:19 am
Dusty @ 10:57 am
Dusty,
I would be happy to answer your mail, perhaps when you have more time. Good luck with your party.
MarkV
August 31st, 2012
12:22 pm
I meant post, naturally.
MarkV
August 31st, 2012
12:46 pm
Dusty @ 10:57 am
Dusty, whenever you find the time, perhaps after your party, I hope you will take the time to read my answer:
“Other countries with universal healthcare do not have higher taxes. (Taxes on personal income over $56,491 in the Netherlands is 52%! 52%!!!!! Yes, they have healthcare for everybody.”
Probably you wanted to say that they have higher taxes. When we talk about how people are taxed in a country, we do not use the percentage for “over” some figure. We use the overall tax burden, which includes all the taxes. That number is 37.5% for Netherlands. Nobody disputed that it is higher than for the US (26.9%), but that difference is not only for health care, it is also for other social programs the people have chosen to have.
“Does COMPULSORY medical insurance sound like freedom to you? It doesn’t to me. “
Does compulsory car insurance sound like freedom to you? (And please, do not give me the silly argument that we do not have to drive.) An what about all the other, compulsory taxes we pay, whether we agree with the purpose or not? Where is some fundamental difference? Do they sound like freedom to you? Personally, I would much more gladly pay a tax, even higher tax, for the purpose of making sure that everybody can get good medical care when sick or injured, that people do not have to make the painful decision whether to go to a doctor or not, that they go for early diagnosis or preventive treatment, that they do not have to go to emergency rooms or hospitals without insurance and have those higher costs get paid by those with insurance. But that is just me, and most people in the developed countries other than the US. I would much prefer to pay my share for health care for everybody than for, for instance, fighter planes the Pentagon does not want. Where is my freedom in paying those taxes?
“The government is demanding that you follow their decisions for your PERSONAL healthcare. What else are they doing to DECIDE for us?”
How does the government decide that?
“There is no way possible to add universal heathcare without adding to that debt.”
And how did you figure out that? Everybody talks about adding to the debt by Obama and ObamaCare. What about the Republicans? Did you see how Ryan squirmed when asked when according to his plan the budget would be balanced and not add to the debt, and he could not answer?
MarkV
August 31st, 2012
12:53 pm
2012 budget:
The Obama administration’s budget request contained $2.627 trillion in revenues and $3.729 trillion in outlays (expenditures) for 2012, for a deficit of $1.101 trillion. The April 2011 Republican plan contained $2.533 trillion in revenues and $3.529 trillion in outlays, for a deficit of $0.996 trillion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_federal_budget