The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
In the passage that Cobalt Blue quotes below from hotair.com, Ed Morrissey hints at a very interesting question. "If Ryan's the nominee," he contends, "we will at along last have that Very Serious Adult Conversation about Medicare and Social Security under the ultimate media spotlight." The unstated question that he hints at is this: Are we ready for such a conversation? And he evidently believes that we are not.
There is one grave problem with Morrissey's analysis, however, and that is this: In politics, the argument that, out of timidity, you do not make is an argument that you tacitly concede. It is, in fact, an argument that you lose. How can we possibly get out of the mess we are in if we do not tackle entitlement reform? How can we possibly pass entitlement reform if we do not have that very serious adult conversation and make a compelling argument on behalf of entitlement reform to the American people? And who can more persuasively make the requisite argument than Paul Ryan?
Morrissey is a fine man. I admire his work, and I suspect that he is oblivious to the implications of what he is saying. But, in effect, he is arguing that we should surrender before the fight begins -- which is what we have been doing for eighty years. -- and I for one have had enough. If we are going to do that, we might as well elect another managerial progressive on the model of Herbert Hoover and Richard Nixon. And, yes, I think that I know his name.
Editor's Update: Ed Morrissey wrote to us to let us know that the portion of the Hot Air post that Professor Rahe (and Member Cobalt Blue) quote from was actually written by Hot Air's pseudonymous "Allah Pundit"
- Comment (55)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
Comments :
Jul '11
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
Thanks for the insights Professor Rahe. The thread that followed my initial post was thought provoking and as the discussion unfolded I came to the same position you describe above. Morrissey's analysis is too pessimistic about the public's ability to face all of our unsustainable entitlement programs. If we're headed over the abyss, we may as well have a genuine discussion about it instead of pretending the abyss doesn't exist.
Edited on Aug 16, 2011 at 8:17pmDec '10
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
Professor, I'd agree with you except the country is hooked on distributionist crack. Somehow the change must be engineered incrementally, perhaps by misdirection to be blunt and without undue fanfare. Otherwise, it's fire arms.
Dec '10
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
Professor, I'd agree with you except the country is hooked on distributionist crack. Somehow the change must be engineered incrementally, perhaps by misdirection to be blunt and without undue fanfare. Otherwise, it's fire arms.
Jun '10
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
...and I'm sure there was a perfect time in history (already past now) to explain to the public that witches don't really have any supernatural powers, and they can't hurt you in any way. But 1680 was maybe not the right year to start educating. Some groundwork had to be laid first.
Jul '10
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
Precisely how I feel about it, Professor. We've whistled past the graveyard long enough. It's time to face down the bogeyman.
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
If you are right in your premise -- and, yes, I know that there is a case to be made for it -- our situation is hopeless. It cannot be done incrementally; the other party will rule at least half the time. All that we will be doing is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Jun '10
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
Anybody remember 1964? It is possible to be ahead of your time. Doesn't mean you aren't right. You're just not what people want to hear. I think it's a valid concern over strategy.
May '10
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
Paul A. Rahe: How can we possibly pass entitlement reform if we do not have that very serious adult conversation and make a compelling argument on behalf of entitlement reform to the American people? And who can more persuasively make the requisite argument than Paul Ryan?
... [I]n effect, he is arguing that we should surrender before the fight begins ...
You're right, there is probably nobody better than Ryan to make the case. The tactical question--and tactics are important if you want results--is whether a seat in the House of Representatives or a presidential campaign is the better place to make the case from.
It's not necessarily true that to opt for the former is to "surrender". If somebody of conservative temperament besides Ryan could win the White House, we'd be better off to still have Ryan leading the effort in the House, perhaps pulling the President to the right.
But if Ryan leaves the House to become President, he may find himself in battles with a House that has drifted left. You can bet a Ryan-less House will want to assert its independence from a President Ryan.
Dec '10
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
This poses the question I ask daily: are we still the heirs of our founders or have we mixed so many illiberal ideas into our national genome that we have become an entirely different species all together? I read Ricochet and believe firmly that the pulse of liberty still beats strongly in our hearts and a yearning for freedom flows through our veins. Then I drive to work among my fellow citizens and my understanding of the situation changes entirely. I honestly have no answer, but I have a suspicion that I will know in early November next year.
Jul '11
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
My apologies to Mr. Morrissey and Allah Pundit for the error; HotAir lists Mr. Morrissey as the author of the post so I assumed he also wrote the addendum.
Edited on Aug 16, 2011 at 7:26pmJun '10
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
If Ryan was debating opponents who argue in good faith, and don't continually ascribe evil motives to conservatives and to their preference for small government, I'd say go for it. But, that's not the case. As we've seen, "Ryan just wants to push your grandmother over a cliff." How does one reply to that "argument" in a 30 second ad?
May '10
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
C'mon guys...if Washington, Adams, Jefferson, et. al. had faced these challenges and backed off, we'd still be singing "God Save the King."
None of it matters if we don't tackle both the entitlement money crisis and the THINKING THAT SPAWNED IT.
Ryan is the right man at the right time...if he'll but grab the ring...
Apr '11
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
The mediscare factor is a valid concern. However, I do think that things have changed since Gingrich era. One difference is that Ryan and his supporters have consistently made the point that their efforts are ultimately being done to strengthen medicare not to cause it to 'wither on the vine'. It seems to me that both Ryan and Rubio speak of medicare reform with healthy respect for the potency of the mediscare tactic.
Another factor that may increase the popularity of medicare reform is how much the cost of medicare (and medicine in general) has increased since the early 1990s. As a percentage of healthcare spending has gone from approx 3.5 percent of GDP to a little under 6 percent.
(http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/downchart_gs.php?year=1989_2016&view=1&expand=&units=p&log=linear&fy=fy12&chart=10-fed&bar=0&stack=1&size=l&title=&state=US&color=c&local=s)
May '10
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
I have trouble imagining a better environment for Paul Ryan: President Obama continues spouting Keynesian nonsense at every campaign stop, while the wreckage of Keynesian policies is still smouldering around us.
Ryan's brief videos about the Path to Prosperity are utterly devastating - see here and here - and the media blitz accompanying his budget plan would have been an ideal time for the Left to drudge up mud on him if any existed. He's also consistently supported closing tax loopholes as part of a wider reform, which strikes me as common sense "independents" can recognize.
For awhile I agreed that "we need Congressman Ryan too much," but what good is a rock-solid House Committee on the Budget when the Senate has no interest in passing one?
America needs to take its medicine now, not in another several years. I think a wide swath of the electorate is more receptive to that fact than we're giving them credit for... and as a conservative with little enthusiasm for the current pool, a Ryan candidacy would get me excited for our chances!
Bias Alert: I'm not from Wisconsin, but did attend Miami University about a decade after Ryan.
Edited on Aug 16, 2011 at 8:03pmMay '10
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
If I recall correctly, we saw lots of arguments a few weeks ago that now was the moment to push for implementation of change that we did not have the votes for and if we did not do it now, it would be too late in 2012. Are we now going to say that bringing our case to the citizens in order to get a mandate for change in 2012 is too early? And we need to avoid the adult discussion for tactical reasons?
If we don't ask for a mandate to change and save our country we will never get the mandate. And elections are meant for that.
May '10
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
In fairness, is there any GOP candidate who won't be smeared the same way?
Romney does nothing for most of the base in addition to getting branded as a corporate stooge with a dash of weird religion; Bachmann's already receiving the Palin treatment; Perry will be portrayed as the bigoted second coming of Chimpy McBushitler. All of the above will face the same Mediscare fire hose, because "Party of No wants to kill granny" is the perfect chaser to "I'm going to give you everything, for free."
Jun '10
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
Perry's signature topic is jobs. Ryan's signature topic is budgetary forecasting. I pick jobs.
May '11
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
I somewhat agree with Professor Rahe that Rep. Ryan could do well, but I warn you about the classic problem. Ryan is a wonk and is very good at getting into the details of how big our problem is and saying we need to do something about it. He even has detailed plans to fix these problems that are very hard to understand. I have known many very smart people who know the product better than anyone on the planet and can convince you of this through presentations, but when it comes to closing the sale, you need the sales or chief executive. You must have the ability to persuade people to your opinion and that is what an executive does. Sen. Rubio is a natural executive but has limited, if any, actual executive experience but when he talks, you listen. Gov. Christie has this gift as well but in a more blunt way When Ryan talks, he makes sense, but will people listen to him long enough to understand the arguments. He could be ready but I fear he would be a disaster. Sen. Rubio is the man we need but we may have to wait unfortunately.
Jul '10
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
At the time of the American Revolution, roughly 40% of the populace backed independence, 20% were British loyalists, and the rest were neutral. The Founders were bold enough to make a stand for their principles.
Today, roughly 40% self-identify as Conservatives, 20% self-identify as Liberals, the rest are moderates. Are we bold enough to make a stand for ours?
Jun '10
Re: The Question Ed Morrissey Poses
Whiskey Sam: At the time of the American Revolution, roughly 40% of the populace backed independence, 20% were British loyalists, and the rest were neutral. The Founders were bold enough to make a stand for their principles.
Today, roughly 40% self-identify as Conservatives, 20% self-identify as Liberals, the rest are moderates. Are we bold enough to make a stand for ours? · Aug 16 at 7:58pm
People had longer attention spans back then, and women couldn't vote. Oh, did I highlight that women couldn't vote? Shame on me.