Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan to deliver SOTU response

That’s State of the Union to you folks that might have a life outside politics. The President’s delivery and Ryan’s response will be next Tuesday, the 25th.

From The Atlantic:

Ryan is close to the GOP House leadership. With Majority Whip Eric Cantor, R-Va., and Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Ca., he helped start the Republican “Young Guns” program to recruit “a new generation” of conservative candidates.

Ryan’s delivery also furthers what one Wisconsin native labels the state’s “quest for world domination.” Indeed, with Wisconsin’s complete flip to a Republican governor, assembly, and senate, the switch to a Republican to the U. S. Senate, and Reince Priebus’ election to chair the GOP, one would think I actually live in a very red state these days.

Let’s hope the laws and taxation line up soon to support our new image. I am – dare I say? – optimistic.

P.S. Expect more heads to explode on Wisconsin’s blue team.

Comments

  1. Ryan Morgan says:

    This is amazingly good news.

    It also makes it more likely that Ryan will be chosen as the VP for whoever wins the nomination. If you look at the electoral map, if Obama loses Wisconsin, he’s probably done for…. obviously it depends to some degree who the candidate is, but the choice would make a sense on a number of levels.

  2. I was just talking electoral Wisconsin with a girlfriend this morning. It’s hard to believe we’ll be gearing up for that one soon.

    But…Ryan could likely be challenging Senator Herb Kohl for the 2012 Senate race. He couldn’t do both. I think Obama will be hard to beat, so I’d say Ryan picks the Senate instead of VP on a potentially losing ticket.

  3. Ryan Morgan says:

    I disagree. Ryan has more power as chairman of the House Budget committee than he would as junior senator. The only way I can see Ryan leaving the House is to run for president or if someone tabs him as their VP.

    As for a challenger to Kohl, I think Neumann might give it a go. I know Sykes took this editorial http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/113405329.html as the beginning of the Neumann 2012 campaign.

  4. I saw that. I don’t know if Neumann would give it a go. I think Sykes would do almost anything to shove Neumann against the wall.

    Face it: Ryan’s goal is the presidency. It may be 8 years of vice president is the way to go. Has any president come from the House?

  5. Randy in Richmond says:

    I can think of two. Lincoln and Gerald Ford.

    Another, JQ Adams served in the House after being President.

    So it doesn’t happen often.

  6. You are awesome when it comes to history. Ford was a VP before P. Lincoln came straight out of the House?

    I can’t imagine a president humbling himself to the House floor after his term these days.

  7. Ryan Morgan says:

    I think this whole meme of “no one from the Senate can be president” (oops, Obama made it after all, and if the economy didn’t collapse, McCain might have and if the Democratic delegate system was a bit different, Hillary might have…. all senators) or “no one from the House can be president” is a little bit overdone.

    People want someone who they perceive as a strong leader to be president. Governors are ordinarily proven leaders and therefore have a good background to be president. But Ryan is definitely starting to get the image of a leader in his party (see the original post for the latest example).

    By analogy, many women want to date a tall man who makes them feel safe and secure. But when you dig deeper, what these women really want (in most cases) is less the tallness and more the security…. they just talk about the tallness because it is easier to define and compare.

    Such is also the case here… people usually talk about the the tangible attribute “he was governor” because it is easier to define than the idea that “he is a leader”. But while the former tends to be correlated with the latter, it is important not to lose sight of the fact that ultimately, the latter is what is important and there are many valid paths to get there.

  8. So, Ryan, you started. Compare and contrast Paul Ryan and Scott Walker. 🙂

  9. Ryan Morgan says:

    Ryan: Would definitely make a great president. IMO, he could start tomorrow and he would be among the top 5 presidents since Lincoln.

    Walker: I’m honestly not sure. On one hand, I think Ryan is brighter and a better communicator. But on the other, so far, I think Walker has done pretty well as governor. So maybe ask me again in a couple years and by that point I’ll have enough data on Walker to give him a fair evaluation.

  10. Ryan Morgan says:

  11. Ryan Morgan says:

    But I get it now…. Ryan is bigger. His height, I mean. 🙂

  12. 🙂

    You started it.

    I do think it was an interesting observation given you articulated the sense of safety with height. I also think it applies to politics.

  13. Ryan M. OK. I like you, I do. But you are clueless about the female mind. X-Nay on the broad judgement of how women think.

  14. Ryan Morgan says:

    Indeed. The taller candidate has won the presidency in most of the past general elections. But again, it is not an absolute rule…. James Madison was 5’4″ and he did okay.

  15. Randy in Richmond says:

    I see that Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) will also be delivering a Tea Party response to the SOTU on a webcast. This is a mistake. Nothing good can come from this but there are numerous bad results that could occur. I would hope this will be rethought and cancelled.

    http://www.minnpost.com/derekwallbank/2011/01/21/25117/bachmann_to_offer_state_of_union_response_on_tea_party_express_site

  16. (Insert theme from The Lone Ranger.)

    That would be GOP Chair Reince Preibus riding in on his horse to unite the GOP and the Tea Party. 🙂

  17. “Ryan M. OK. I like you, I do. But you are clueless about the female mind. X-Nay on the broad judgement of how women think.”

    I thought I was given women the benefit of the doubt. Either they care more about the underlying value than the physical attribute, in which case I am right, or they care more about the physical than the underlying value, in which case they are shallow. 🙂

    Of course, the fact that I am a short male and may play in here some how….. but my wife says she feels safe and secure when I am around, so my broad generalization worked out to be true for her!

  18. I’m so confused now. I think I’ll go to bed and start fresh in the morning.

  19. Me too, Cindy. Not even sure where to start on that, but for some reason, magnanimously giving women ‘the benefit of the doubt’ on this is irksome. And then you communicate in your next sentences no benefit and full doubt.

    I think I’ll further decipher your response after my morning coffee.

  20. Randy in Richmond says:

    Ryan
    There’s only one thing you need to know about women:

    You’ll never understand women.

    Once you accept that you’ll be sorta okay. 🙂

  21. Randy, thanks for straightening that out. 😉

  22. Well, Ryan. That explains a bit. I would have guessed you were either a lurking giant or a bit on the short side, stature-wise. What you are doing, is projecting your opinion as opposed to truly observing INDIVIDUALS of the female human species. A bad habit to embrace. :).

    I’m guessing your wife’s sense of security has to do with your proactive and take-it-on personality, not a physicality. I’d take a shorter height, quick-thinking and reactive hero over an unobservant, indecisive lug of a brute as my protector in a dark alley. (Although maybe most men would be more intimidated by size?)

    BTW. I didn’t choose my mate based on the need to be ‘protected’, although there is an innate humaness in BOTH sexes for a sense of security in a relationship. While I am surrounded by ‘tall’ men in my family, (hubby 6’ish and sons 6’2″&6’5″ and I’m proudly ‘short’) they will tell you I am the protector of the den – the lioness, mama grizzly, or whatever gnarly animal image you want to conjure- so your ‘needy woman’ assumption was quite irritating. Besides, doesn’t research show women are more attracted to beard growth than height for instinctive choice in choosing a mate/protector?

    I’M KIDDING.

  23. Sorry if my analogy came off as at all misogynistic or irritating. I’m just operating off of the knowledge that most women are attracted to height and that attraction must be rooted in something…. and if that something is not some form of a sense of security, I don’t know what else it might be. My view is that both sexes need one another, always have, and always will. So no malice towards women whatsoever was intended.

    On another note, I was really bummed that you were kidding about that beard growth not being a huge attractor thing…. I would have loved it if that was true. 🙂

  24. OK, Ryan. We are good. And to make you feel even better about your manly beardness, there WAS a study that women who are ovulating ( sorry for the girl talk for those who are squeamish) are more attracted to stubbly-faced men than baby-faced men. Makes for stronger genetic pool, theoretically. Now go pound your chest.:)

  25. RAWR!!!! 🙂

  26. the choosing of a vp by both parties is to get a person that helps the ticket without heavy baggage about issues. neither party has done an admirable job. its also about being ready to be president, in case. the present system leaves something to be desired in a non-partisan fashion.

  27. Randy in Richmond says:

    I was wrong. I thought the Michelle Bachmann tea party response to the SOTU address was a bad idea. It was the best speech of the evening. It was relatively short and to the point. It offered no sputnik moments but gave simple, easy to follow facts of where the Obama administration has and is taking us fiscally. Specific, doable suggestions are offered. Contrary to my initial critism I now believe good things can occur as a result of her comments.

    Watch her for yourself:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fRxO_Yx99I