Ryan calls for unity among Republicans
WASHINGTON — Speaking at a forum on the state of conservatism, GOP Rep. Paul Ryan called for a ceasefire of sorts between two of the movement's key factions, traditionalists and libertarians.
"Whenever Republicans lose an election, a factional dispute arises about economic issues versus moral or social issues. Traditionalists and libertarians blame each other, each claiming Republicans would do better without the other," said Ryan, the Janesville lawmaker.
"Why anyone would think a minority could grow into a majority by splitting itself in half is a political and mathematical mystery to me," he said.
Ryan was one of two Midwestern conservatives featured at the gathering, hosted by the Hudson Institute's Bradley Center for Philanthropy and Civic Renewal, which is funded by Milwaukee's Bradley Foundation. The other was Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels.
Both men are popular in the conservative movement and regarded as good political models by fellow Republicans. Daniels has been touted as a potential presidential candidate in 2012, but he ruled that out here Wednesday.
Daniels said conservatives need to be activist, aggressive and experimental in their ideas but friendlier in tone. He skeptically noted President Barack Obama's much-discussed desire for "empathy" in a Supreme Court nominee. But the governor said that in the political and public-policy debate, empathy is a quality that the right needs to display.
"The ability to put oneself in the place, and to feel deeply about, the concerns and the hopes and the dreams and the fears of other people is something that must be visibly a part of what we do," said Daniels, adding that conservatives have to "assert with credibility that we understand what is going on in the lives of everyday people."
The stated theme of the event was "Making Conservatism Credible Again," part of a running conversation on the right about the lessons of the GOP's election defeats and the future of the movement.
Like other gatherings of its kind, it featured a mix of horror about the Obama agenda (spending, deficits, government ownership of car companies); faith that conservative principles remain popular with the public; confidence that Democrats are overreaching; anxiety about how long it will take to come back politically; and gallows humor about the plight of the GOP.
A far larger gathering on the left was held this past week in Washington, an annual conference of liberal activists organized by the Campaign for America's Future. According to a straw poll, 90 percent of those in attendance approved of the president's performance, 3 percent viewed Rush Limbaugh favorably, and more than 80 percent backed an investigation of the fraud and excesses of Wall Street.
At the conservative event, meanwhile, Ryan lamented what he described as the threat to Western civilization posed by the erosion of market freedoms, and Daniels decried the "shock-and-awe statism of the last few months."
Daniels said conservatives need to be single-minded about addressing their political arguments to young voters, who voted overwhelmingly for Obama in the last election. He cited as one example the "terrifying deficits" in the Democratic budget and "the threat that poses to every young person in this country."
On the issue of immigration, a divisive one within the GOP, Daniels said it was vital to push newcomers to assimilate and speak English.
But he added: "I think it's a grave, grave mistake to act as though … in any way becoming a more multi-ethnic society is a threat to America. It's a reality, and it can be the strength of America as it's always been, if we embrace it."
Jun 11, 2009 at 12:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
calitas~ Well said! I don't know how blind our society is to not see what's going on! The democrat's and republican's are simply pretenders... meaning, how can they unify a country when they can't even come to common ground within their own party, muchless with the two parties!! It all boils down to leadership. It's cut and dry. Do what's right without the agenda's, stop putting band-aids on the problems they create themselves anyway, and get to the root of things. The govt. is a large corporation who thrives on the stupidity of it's "clients" (the american people) and they have no incentive to do what's right because it doesn't serve them financially and their pride won't allow it. An uneducated, sleepy society of American's is reaping what we've sown!. It's simple, if we don't come together on some common ground and unify, they won't.
Jun 11, 2009 at 12:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
Lakennedy-Barney Frank is a Democrat and his party is just as guilty in this mess as the Republicans. I am a Libertarian. I think both parties need to clean ranks and to install term limits and stop their current agreed mode of operation of splitting the country to keep themselves elected.
Jun 11, 2009 at 2:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
Here is the actual link;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8jpN4DPkLE&NR=1
Jun 11, 2009 at 2:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
I will never understand the hatred directed at Rush Limbaugh. For anyone who truly listens to him for any period of time I can’t believe people could see him as anything that a true American patriot. Anyone who has about 10 minutes of time I hope you enjoy this short segment from his radio show. It really says a lot. Just listen…http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8jpN4DPkLE&NR=1
Jun 10, 2009 at 1:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
Callsit: That's one perfect example of what I mean. Another is the Republican ideal: no rules are good rules.
+
For some reason, Callsit along with the majority of the other bloggers here insist on only addressing this argument as either a Democrat or a Republican. Don't you see that that mindset is the root of the problem? We shouldn't be endorsing any of these crooks. We should be questioning everyone one of them. In the past, I argued very strongly for the Democratic party just because I thought I was a Democrat. I'm not really. Neither are the majority of you. You're not Republican's, either. Not one of us agrees with either party wholeheartedly. We're just arguing for what we see as the lesser of the two evils. That's not okay.
+
I voted for Obama, but I am disgusted by his economic policy. Worst than that, I'm scared of the ramifications it will have on my children and their children. Just because I can say that doesn't mean that I support what the Republican's stand for. I refuse to choose between either of these parties anymore. From now on, I'll be looking at the individual and their record. I wish you guys would join me.
Jun 10, 2009 at 1:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
"Republicans (and politicians in general) keep trying to balance budgets simply by cutting spending instead of eliminating waste and funding programs that produce results."
You're being too generous. Republicans TALK about cutting spending, but when they had control of Congress for six of the last eight years, they just couldn't do it. I actually believe in many of their economic principles, but they have yet to put their whole philosophy into practice. Yes, they cut taxes once, but followed that up with out of control spending, not including whatever was spent for the Iraq War, as you point out.
Jun 10, 2009 at 12:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
How pathetic does your judgment, reasoning and belief system have to be in order to defend a hate-filled, drug addled hypocrite like Rush Limbaugh. He is an embarrassment to the human race, much the same as Michelle Bachman and Anne Coulter.
Conservatives will never be viewed as empathetic until they learn to craft policies that do more to enrich the lives of ALL Americans. Their tax policies did nothing for the lower and middle class and benefited only those who derive much of their wealth from investment income. Trickle down economics is not a reliable method of either growing an economy or sustaining a healthy economy.
Deficit spending began early in the Bush Administration with a Republican majority yet very little apprehension was expressed by ANYONE in the majority. The Administrations War budget was NEVER included with the congressional budget but always presented as an "emergency" spending bill. Billions of OUR TAX DOLLARS (I'm not yelling, I'm just talking really slow)were spent without ANY oversight. THAT MEANS BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF OUR MONEY IS UNACCOUNTED FOR AND PROBABLY IN THE HANDS OF PRIVATE CONTRACTORS WHO WERE AWARDED NO BID CONTRACTS BY...you guessed it, the conservative Republican Administration. Conservatives are up in arms about all the tax money used to fund the bailout for OUR economy but never said a word while billions were handed out with nary a clue as to what it was for other than "the War effort". Both Parties deserve credit (or blame) for the lack of oversight which led to the collapse of our economy. Republicans (and politicians in general) keep trying to balance budgets simply by cutting spending instead of eliminating waste and funding programs that produce results. No Republican yet has come up with anything that resembles a viable alternative to the "bailout". You really think Republicans would have let "Big Business" fail? What does Ryan view as "market freedoms"? The right for Health Insurance companies to rake in huge profits? Privatizing Social Security?
Jun 10, 2009 at 12:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
lakennedy-Do you mean the lack of regulations on mortgage lending perpetuated by Barney Frank and the rest of his party?
Jun 10, 2009 at 11:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
Lakennedy~~~> Back in 06' I worked at GM as "summer help" and one morning on my way into work, there was Paul Ryan handing out little flyers.He walked up to me, shook my hand, introduced himself, as did I, and I could not get over his smile or eyes! My grandmother used to work for him, so when he heard my last name he thanked me for having such an "amazing woman" like her as my grandmother, and told me I was lucky. As far as my political view goes.....I think he has a few things going for him.
*****
Either way I had to ad my two cents as always.
Jun 10, 2009 at 11:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
horselovngirl: I hear that everywhere! I don't see it though. Nonetheless, you're on to something.
Jun 10, 2009 at 11:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
brwe: "--at least corporations know how to make a profit!"
+
Really? Like GM made a profit?
+
Don't get me wrong, I don't support the current economic policy, but to assert that the former policy of complete unregulation was superior is not only silly, it's downright dangerous. Brwe made an excellent point when writing that most American's prefer to live in the middle of the two, the problem is that before we know it, there will be no middle. If there even is right now.
Jun 10, 2009 at 10:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
Paul Ryan is soooo dreamy ;)
Jun 9, 2009 at 8:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
Listeners don't count...voters do.
Jun 9, 2009 at 8:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
How many listeners does Rush have, and how many do you people that like to debase Rush have? How do you think your bottom line stacks up against his? Now, who would be laughing at whom?
Jun 9, 2009 at 2:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
If liberal bigots (yes, that label goes both ways) paid more attention between their knee-jerks, thay'd hear that all those names dropped are saying pretty much the same thing! Paul Ryan is just quieter, but don't break precedent & let the facts get in your way!
Jun 9, 2009 at 1:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
Rush Limbaugh flunked out of a STATE college to start a radio career. Sure, it made him filthy rich and famous, but the guy is a long-winded pompous bigot. He is just a radio pundit with no formal education or involvement in politics. Why is he even mentioned here? The Bill O'Reillys, Ann Coulters, and Rush Limbaughs of the world make me sad for respectable Republicans like Paul Ryan.
Jun 9, 2009 at 11:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
I think we've got a few confused people here. biggirl- I haven't heard Ryan make the statement you credit him with. If he did, please tell me when, at least, so I can read it. Just so we're clear, the last 20 years includes both Democratic & Republican administrations. Also, I believe most of that time saw Democratically- controlled legislatures. The only proposals I'm aware of to "privatize" Social Security, involved allowing individual citizens--IF THEY WISHED--to direct A PORTION of their funds to a private investment vehicle. So, technically, that's not govt. "handing over", so much as allowing YOU to hand over--at your discretion! giddyup--Are you paying attention here? By the way, the only money your govt. HAS is (or at least was) your/our money! So the trillions they've been throwing out the windows on our behalf (with absolutely NO input from you or me) are also your/our money!Lastly, socialism is defined as extreme control by the government (where we're headed in a hurry), not by corporations! Most Americans prefer to live between those extremes, but if you had to choose one or the other--at least corporations know how to make a profit!
Jun 9, 2009 at 10:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
The grass roots conservative movement that is taking place across the country hopefully will have some impact on the next electon, and NO it is not headed by Rush! It's a group that is tired of the government giving away our country on a silver platter with a smile! I hope some of our people in washington will rise up and join us! Paul Ryan I hope you can join us too!
Jun 9, 2009 at 12:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
Excuse me, "government money to private corporations a la his Social Security "reform."" That would be MY money the government TAKES from me and redistributes to others. What's wrong with letting me keep it and take care of myself? Oh, that wouldn't fit the socialist agenda.
Jun 8, 2009 at 11:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
"reckless plans to hand over govt. money to private corporations"--Have you been asleep for the last six months or so? We've shortened that now to "bailout" & "stimulus".
Jun 8, 2009 at 11:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
It's a mystery to me how Ryan can claim that the unchecked, state-supported corporatism of the last 20 years is representative of Western Civilization. He needs to make such statements, I suppose, so that he can justify some of his reckless plans to hand over government money to private corporations a la his Social Security "reform."
Jun 8, 2009 at 11:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
I'm just happy that Rush seems to have somewhat of a grip on his drug problem.
Jun 8, 2009 at 9:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
I knew I was missing an adjective used by tolerant liberals--"hypocrite"= vocal conservative. Thanks!
Jun 8, 2009 at 8:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
Limbag is nothing but a hypocrite. But I guess that's what happens when you get strung out on oxycotin.
Jun 8, 2009 at 8:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
Hmm, curious. Did I miss it? When did Rush announce his candidacy?
Jun 8, 2009 at 8:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
"more active"
-
Climb out from under the rock, his show has been on for over 20 years.
Jun 8, 2009 at 7:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Now that Rush Limbaugh is getting more active, the republicans are almost sure to go extinct.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.