Thursday, May 26, 2011
BeldarBlog's new sidebar endorsement
Some readers may recall my sidebar endorsement of Sen. John McCain after he sewed up the GOP presidential nomination in 2008:
After Sen. McCain chose Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate, my improved view of the combined ticket was reflected in a different sidebar endorsement that I ran through the November election:
My new sidebar endorsement is, like the others, an unpaid, spontaneous, and independent expression of my First Amendment rights. It has not been coordinated with or sponsored by Chairman Paul Ryan or anyone else:
I assert no copyright to the words or the public-domain photo, and anyone else who wishes to urge Chairman Ryan to run is welcome to copy and republish this .jpg with my enthusiastic blessing. This endorsement implies no disrespect to any of the other existing or rumored candidates for the GOP presidential nomination.
I'm in, Mr. Ryan. Consider me a pre-charter member of the "Ryan for President 2012 Campaign."
Your party and your country need you — not just as House Budget Chair, but in the White House — and we're calling!
Note: Trackbacks are moderated and do not appear automatically. They're also spam-filtered. Feel free to email me if yours didn't go through. Trackbacks must contain a link to this post. TrackBack URL for this entry:
Other weblog posts, if any, whose authors have linked to BeldarBlog's new sidebar endorsement and sent a trackback ping are listed here:
(1) Gregory Koster made the following comment | May 26, 2011 2:13:03 PM | Permalink
Dear Mr. Dyer: Come now, don't be shy---tell us who you REALLY want...Good heavens that reprise of the "Vote for the grumpy old man" gave me a start.
Your forthright declaration has a lot to it, if you grant one premise: that domestic affairs, especially the federal deficit, will be the driving force of the 2012 election. I am not so sure of this. I think it entirely possible that foreign affairs will continue to be the primary concern facing the electorate (whether the electorate cares to face them back is another story entirely.) Specifically, foregn affairs as they affect domestic finance e.g. foreign purchases of American debt. I would feel better if a) Ryan had more knowledge of foreign affairs and b) was willing to run. I don't think a draft will do. Ryan's present position is nowhere near Eisenhower's in January 1952. Too, remember that Ike had to fight hard for the nomination, and his nomination was more dicey than he would have liked.
I think the best thing to do is wait until this fall. Events are going to march along, The One will continue to make his moronic blunders great and small. SO I think the thing to do is wait and follow Reagan's Eleventh Commandment.
(2) Whitehall made the following comment | May 26, 2011 4:07:44 PM | Permalink
I see on Drudge where Dick Cheney is quoted as saying about Ryan "I worship the ground he walks on" yet stops short of a full endorsement - so far.
If two men of affairs I hold in highest respect - Cheney and Beldar - are so hot for Ryan, I will certainly continue to rank him at the top of my list.
My own opinion about Ryan is the same as Lincoln's about Grant - "I need him. He fights." The ability to fight and fight well for the survival of this country and for our freedoms is the primary factor in my support. I think the core of Trump's brief popularity was the perception that he was perfectly willing to take it right to Obama.
(1) Gregory Koster
I would feel better if a) Ryan had more knowledge of foreign affairs ...
Try this, then.
Whomever the GOP nominates, it seems likely that it will be Obama he/she will be running against.
Have you seen any evidence whatever that Paul Ryan truly has less knowledge of foreign affairs than Obama?
That would rather difficult as Obama has dropped the bar to the floor.
(4) Gregory Koster made the following comment | May 26, 2011 11:02:21 PM | Permalink
Dear Paul: You are right, The One is as Balfour said, a strong contender for The Cleverest Bloody Fool Alive title when it comes to foreign affairs. But canning him at the polls is only half the job. Once the GOP replacement for The One is in office, will he be up to:
a) international financing of the US deficit (Ryan would be great on this one)
b) the persistent trade imbalance between China-US
c) the likely distinegration (or even worse the aftermath of) the Euro, possibly including the end of the EU.
d) Mexico as a failed state on our border
e) oh yes, those little conflicts in Iraq/Libya/Afghanistan
f) the consequences of the American fueled world food price inflation on the Third World, particularly Egypt. Ryan could do some real good by blowing up the US ethanol program. I know he's spoken out against it, though I can't lay my hand on the cite at this moment.
The danger I see for Ryan is a Herman Cain moment i.e. "How do you stand on the right of return for Palestinians, Mr. Cain?" "Huh?" I don't think that was a fatal error, but it certainly hurt Cain. It would hurt Ryan far more with the press's blood instincts out to hurt what they see as a real contender. The press doesn't believe Cain can do anything, hence they do what is safe: ignore him. Pounding on a black man running for Prez has some perils for the press, so they will continue to ignore him. Ryan will get no such ignorance, just a savagery even worse than McC got in 2008.
A strong team at Treasury would be helpful. I am thinking of Mitt Romney for that post.
If you'll permit me a metaphor: it doesn't matter if Ryan can broad jump ten feet compared to The One's tripping over his shoelaces---if the gap to be leaped over is twenty feet wide. Rermember, the press will be savagely against any racist GOPer who dares to bring down The One, the Lightbringer. Given that The One will be leaving the nation in a wretched state, this leaves the road ahead with extra traps for any GOP Prez in 2013. Dam the press anyway!
(5) Milhouse made the following comment | May 27, 2011 10:26:28 AM | Permalink
Whomever the GOP nominates, it seems likely that it will be Obama he/she will be running against.
I don't think so. I'm still expecting Clinton to find some matter of deeply-held principle on which to differ from Obama, and have no choice but to resign and challenge him. And since, as far as we know, she's never killed anyone, I expect her to succeed where Kennedy failed in 1980. And having done that, if she hopes to prevent the blacks from staying home in November she'll have to pick a black running mate. I used to think this would be Harold Ford, but his political career has gone spectacularly down the drain, so I don't know whom she'll pick now.
I'm also still predicting a GOP ticket of Palin/Jindal. So no white men on either major party ticket.
(6) DRJ made the following comment | May 27, 2011 4:00:29 PM | Permalink
I'm pulling for Perry in 2012 with Palin as my second choice. Both you and Cheney are right that Ryan is great, especially on the budget, but I think we need him most where he is.
(7) Mark L made the following comment | May 28, 2011 3:34:12 PM | Permalink
What are your thoughts on Perry? Besides that you are a Longhorn and he is an Aggie.
I figure him as another misunderestimated candidate, like W. Perry always seems to win ugly, but always wins.
(The real question for any GOP candidate is can they take at least one of Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Colorado and Nevada. I have the Republicans at 265 pretty solid electoral votes, so winning any one of those states gives Obama the boot.)
(8) C. S. P. Schofield made the following comment | May 29, 2011 6:07:29 PM | Permalink
How about this for a generic slogan;
"Vote for ________; because he's NOT an in-over-his-head affirmative action hire you aren't allowed to criticize"
Mark L (#7), as I wrote in various comments on Bryan Preston's recent post at the PJ Tattler, I've voted for Gov. Perry several times in statewide elections, and I can certainly imagine scenarios in which I'd vote for him in a GOP presidential primary, depending on the alternatives. I'd certainly support him if he became the GOP nominee — but again, because of the general election alternative, that's an awfully low hurdle (see, e.g., my original endorsement of John McCain for the 2008 general election).
I'm generally pleased with Perry's performance in statewide offices in Texas. And he's certainly had, and successfully bypassed, a great many opportunities to screw things up; that's an under-appreciated quality in politicians.
But I also think he's generally ridden a conservative wave rather than conspicuously leading it — which is to say, I think most of the reasons why Texas has fared so well, especially relative to states like California, New York, or Illinois, have more to do with the innate self-reliance and other values of our citizens than with who's been its governor. Gov. Perry didn't have to create Texas' pro-business, pro-free market, pro-entrepreneur climate here — nor even to swim upstream to maintain it — because Texas has been that way since even before it won its independence from Mexico in 1836. It was that way under Democratic state leaders during most of the 20th Century until the national Democratic Party followed its most crazed partisans into extreme race and class warfare and statism. To the benefit of the Grand Old Party, most Texans wouldn't go along, and Perry's quite representative of the former Democrats who've converted and repented.
By any evaluation, Perry's moved substantially to the right since he was Texas chairman for Al Gore's 1988 presidential campaign. Indeed, he ran substantially to the right of U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, an old-guard John Tower/Bill Clements/G.H.W. Bush-type Republican, to win the 2010 Texas GOP gubernatorial primary. And as governor, his limited deviations from the paths blazed by Dubya have mostly been to the right.
Gov. Perry certainly hasn't yet faced anything remotely comparable to the electoral challenge that the 2012 GOP presidential nominee is going to face. But then again, neither have any of the other current or speculated GOP candidates.
The comments to this entry are closed.