The American Spectator

TruthSayer| 6.3.11 @ 12:24AM

Paul Ryan is the new Ronald Reagan. He simply MUST run for President and win. Prior to Obama, sitting Senators did not have a great record of winning the Presidency. Governors and prior Military men usually win the Presidency. Ryan is already a national figure and is extremely articulate so the usual rules don't apply to him.

Occam's Tool| 6.3.11 @ 12:59AM

Ryan would be good. As PG Wodehouse would put it, he's "sound on pekes."

home insurance Plano| 6.3.11 @ 2:31AM

I judge you score to change a bit the system and usability of your journal.

martin j smith| 6.3.11 @ 7:46AM

Paul Ryan is a human being--who I happen to admire. He is not a "Reagan" --as I am not looking for anyone to be emulated on the moral basis of Sainthood. When THIS happens the human being becomes unreal,a myth and from there lies evolve.
That is the story of the LEFT. I do not want that.
But one thing I do like about Paul Ryan --and this is refreshing is this: In the relative scheme of Politicians he is honest straightforward and has the POTENTIAL to be a fine LEADER. He is relatively young and because of that can reach younger generations where I have heard and seen too much stupidity abounds. And, in addition he is not afraid to take on Obama directly,bravely, and with great confidence and integrity.

The American people desrve better and if Paul Ryan did run it would be a heck of a race because I think he is smart,knows the games played by the LEFT and I think he could be Obama. But again, and do not take this the wrong way, but if things continue to go as they are Mickey Mouse could beat Obama because Obama will beat himself.

JimH| 6.3.11 @ 8:10AM

Paul Ryan, Amen brother. Increased military spending and adventures abroad without regard for the economy is a mugs game. Look how well it worked for the CCCP.

air charter dc| 6.3.11 @ 8:13AM

Please let me know if you are fascinated to line as article writer for me? I can offering $10/article.

Gipper1980| 6.3.11 @ 8:25AM

Our country needs & must have a President who is not afraid to handle special interest groups (gays, environmental whack jobs, leftist wingnuts, Unions, e.g.) in an honest & forthright manner. He/she must be honest - a huge challenge in & of itself - and not worry about trying to please both sides of the aisle, which cannot be done anyway. McCain & others have made the mistake of "reaching across the aisle" in order to attain an agreement on budgets, defense spending, taxation, and other pointless endeavors. Liberals cannot be appeased & they don't compromise easily. As politics are nowadays, the only way liberals can be reached is by incremental steps that ultimately lead to them getting 100% of what they wanted all along.
Since the end of the Reagan era, so-called conservatives, RINOs, and Republicans, in general, have done nothing except cave to the likes of Reid, Pelosi, Rangel, Dingle, the late Ted Kennedy, Frank, and other prominent Socialcrats.
President Obama could hardly be more bold in expressing his Socialist agenda & yet there are those who believe his efforts to dismantle our Republic is the sort of 'hope & change' we've long needed.
Let's put this in perspective: if this were the early days of pre-Independence & we were in the birth pangs of America, Obama would have been labeled a traitor long ago & jettisoned from the political scene & forced to seek asylum elsewhere.

nyc parent| 6.3.11 @ 9:45AM

He would be the perfect Veep choice.
Showcase fiscal seriousness; give him a seat at the table with the Pres; task him with liaison with Legislators on fiscal/budget issues.
Will give him (with reasonable good fortune) 4+ years on the national and world stage to gain national leadership credentials so he can run as heir apparent in future races.
I hope the Republican candidate will take advantage of Mr. Ryan as a legacy to the country.

David W| 6.3.11 @ 11:13AM

I'd rather have him tackle the budget and deficit than run for pres. Do we believe that the Conservatives/Republicans would be standing this firm on the budget if Ryan wasn't in the house?

Red Phillips| 6.3.11 @ 1:36PM

If Tabin likes the speech, then we can be sure that Ryan deviated little if at all from current interventionist groupthink. There is no need to balance our "values" and "interests" in the Middle East. There is a need to disengage and mind our own business.

Also, no speeach given by a "conservative" to the Alexander Hamilton Society should begin with anything other than "Alexander Hamilton was an idiot!" The American conservative line runs through Henry, Jefferson, Calhoun, etc. Not Hamilton and his hyperfederalist cohorts.

Red Phillips| 6.3.11 @ 3:25PM

The Weekly Standard article says Ryan embraces "exceptionalism" and rejects "isolationism." No wonder Tabin likes the speech. That means we could expect no real change from the status quo from Ryan. No thanks.