Why the Two-Party System is Pure Mythology

My Twitter timeline is growing more and more libertarian all the time. And, truth be told, so am I. There was a time when I accepted the reality of the two-party tradition in America. Today it is little more than slight distinctions about which party's candidates can convince us they can manage the intricacies of big government better.

Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI)

Sadly, while I still like Paul Ryan a lot, the release of his latest version of the budget features only a slightly lower baseline over the next ten years than the trajectory of the Senate's version, released last week by the Senate's budget chairperson, Senator Patty Murray (D-WA). Give her credit - at least she came up with the first Senate budget in over 1400 days. That said, we have yet to pass a federal budget during the administration of Barack Obama, much less seriously consider balancing one. Finally, last week Barack Obama admitted he has no intention of balancing the budget nor reducing the deficit during his remaining term. At least now we know where he stands, since he no longer is accountable to voters. His budget "proposal" merely calls for more taxes and more spending.

According to Ryan’s version of what he would advocate (these numbers are lifted straight from his proposal) we would reduce federal spending as a percentage of GDP from 22.2 percent this year to 19.1 percent in 2023. That is at least a start in the right direction, but hardly draconian in its import. However, if you believe what the Democrat/progressive/liberal elements tell us, such a brutal meat cleaver reduction in the federal spending projections over the next ten years would inflict almost incomprehensible pain on Americans.

Here's what caught my attention from Ryan's CPAC speech last week: “We don’t see the debt as an excuse to cut with abandon, to shirk our obligations. We see it as an opportunity to reform government, to make it cleaner and more effective. That’s what conservatives stand for.”

But here's the rub. Isn't that exactly what Democrats believe too? Aren't they always proclaiming their efforts are designed to give us more effective and efficient government too?

I studied Ryan’s proposal to see if I could find anything that would forever end the federal government’s involvement in education. We've been talking about that since the days of Reagan who wanted to close the doors on the Department of Education. No sign of that in Ryan's budget. All the federal programs that sponsor job training are still there in the Ryan budget. There is nothing to eliminate the Departments of Energy, Transportation, and all the rest. There are so many bloated federal agencies that could be eliminated presidential candidate Rick Perry stumbled during a debate on his recitation of the list of agencies he would cut and it cost him the nomination. But nowhere in the latest Ryan budget do you find provisions for cutting them out.

There is a plus, however. Ryan's budget calls for ending Obamacare, but that isn't going to happen now as that train left the station and is picking up speed on the implementation rails as it rumbles into an insurance plan near you soon. But even if that were a successful legislative coup (and it won't be) the Ryan budget fails to eliminate the federal government’s involvement in health care. At least Ryan wants to cap higher education subsidies, but that doesn't terminate the federal government’s involvement in education. Well, you get the idea. The core problem is simple: More efficient government isn’t the same as limited government. That's the important Constitutional mandate we have bargained away over the years as both political parties have given us more and more government. Whether the federal government is efficient or effective is a debate I don't even care about. I'm becoming more libertarian because it's the only option left to us.

I'm just old enough to remember when we thought we could believe a two-party political system consisting of Republicans and Democrats representing vastly different values and objectives existed. However, true patriots who value liberty and freedom from tyranny, those who are accurately informed, well researched and historically astute know otherwise. Now I see things much differently. The thin veneer of political differentiation has finally peeled away. By the time George W. Bush and Henry Paulson at the end of the Bush era decided to bail out Wall Street and bankers, the illusion was forever evaporated. Government can only fund solutions with money it collects from taxpayers, and so far there seems to be insufficient angst among voters to stop it from escalating.

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY)

Something extraordinary happened a couple of weeks ago on the Senate floor. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) launched a nearly 13-hour filibuster over an issue that barely aroused any interest among Americans, yet it clearly illuminated this rising tide of awareness of the thinly-veiled differences between the establishment powers in both political parties. What stunned me was the reaction by certain members of the Republican party we must not minimize. I happen to like the old Jimmy Stewart movie "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington," only because it's about the little guy who dares to take on the establishment against all odds. Rand Paul's filibuster was a throw-back to earlier times. Here's at least one man (and there are growing numbers) who still recognizes the Constitution of the United States and Bill of Rights as the supreme law of the land. I include Mike Lee (R-UT) and Ted Cruz (R-TX) in that group. John McCain called them "wacko birds." Then he thought better of the comment and apologized. That defiant act of filibuster by one man had much deeper meaning on many more levels than the topic at hand. When "wackos" are people who believe in limited government and liberty, then I choose to stand with the wackos.

Senator Paul asked for a simple response about the potential use of drones on American citizens on American soil from the Attorney General who represents the Executive branch of our government. Attorney General Eric Holder did not respond, so Senator Paul took to the Senate floor and spoke for 13 hours. As painful as it was for the Executive and Judicial branches and their media surrogates to even acknowledge Senator Paul’s persistence, his actions eventually generated a response. A short letter signed by Attorney General Holder was begrudgingly released. The answer was “no.” As remote as the possibility may seem to some, at least this administration is now on the record if that means anything.

Every freedom-loving American should be heralding Senator Rand Paul for what he did. It was evidence that every American who still cares about the rule of law and our God-given rights as enumerated in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights has at least one voice who speaks for them on the Senate floor. One would think that kind of issue would resonate throughout America without regard to political party. But he received nothing but ridicule for what some claimed was a cheap political grandstanding maneuver. I saw it as much more.

I consider myself a Conservative. I used to think I was a "moderate" Conservative. I find I must distinguish what that means to me and what it means to Paul Ryan, however. My loyalty is to our Constitution and Bill of Rights. I'm increasingly more interested in like-minded individuals who share that desire above party label. To stand for only a better-managed big government is now bordering on tyrannical and treasonous in my mind.

On the morning of the 9/11 attacks, I watched in horror as the Twin Towers collapsed and the realization we were attacked by foreign enemies slowly sank in that morning. Looking back on the aftermath of that day, I think I supported wholeheartedly, as many Americans did, the passage of legislation that formed even more agencies of the federal government. The Patriot Act and the Department of Homeland Security are only two examples. Now I believe I was wrong in my initial embrace of those moves. In the subsequent bursting of the bubble of Wall Street excesses with securitized mortgages and other dicey investment vehicles, there came clarity. I have discerned we were then, and still are to an increasing rate, being lied to by elected officials on both sides of the political spectrum. The "BIG LIE" is that we are going to be okay with the status quo they so desperately seem determined to perpetuate.

I've stopped listening to the so-called "Conservative" talk radio pundits and the TV talking heads. Like an old soap opera where you can tune out for months at a time, then tune in for a few minutes, the story lines never change and the themes are repetitive. The search for truth is paramount in these last days. And the truth cannot be found in the political realm.

Jesus Christ laments over Jerusalem

You are either loyal to God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ, or you are not. It really won't matter much which political logos you're wearing when the elements melt down in the fervent heat yet to come. What will matter instead is your allegiance to God and our Constitution and Bill of Rights in America. As Christ was rejected of His own in His day, so He is being rejected once again in our day. I surmise He laments over Washington D.C. today as He once did over Jerusalem. The imperial government, the pervasive institution to which we are all being asked to pledge allegiance and to turn for sustenance, has forsaken her birthright. These are values our great nation once represented. There is no political party left, however, to claim the crown of champion for those values. Both parties have been corrupted. As long as I live I will resist any and all attempts by others to impose a godless theocracy upon us. If America fails, there will be no other contender left on earth in the running among the super powers to champion the cause of freedom.

Merely proposing that the federal government borrow and spend less than what is currently projected is certainly better than the alternative of burying our heads in the sand and pretending we are not in a spending and debt crisis. But those who accept Paul Ryan's version of the proposed federal budget cannot be serious if their goal is limited government. We must come to a point where we must find the collective will as free citizens to impose limits all the areas where government has intruded on our rights.

Some people worry what will happen if draconian measures are taken to cut federal spending. Think of the "safety net" suddenly being snatched out from underneath everyone. Think of all the unemployment if federal employment for millions of Americans suddenly terminates. In the garden of Eden, were Adam and Eve firmly clutching their Social Security checks and food stamps? When did we lose sight of working by the sweat of our own brows? There were no promises then, and there are none now. Ryan is defending a mythological fantasy when he says he can ensure the promises their government has made to Americans in the years ahead. What he's really saying is I can do it better than Democrats, when both have moved this country beyond the ability to deliver on those promises without severe cutbacks in the status quo. That's a political agenda politicians don't dare enunciate for fear of losing the next election.

I've heard the list of horribles of what might happen if we take control of our own debt and spending now, but what if we are already at the tipping point where the collapse is imminent anyway? Isn't the path we are on amply demonstrated by now to be unsustainable? Seems to me we must prune back the spending and debt bushes voluntarily now, or the pruning will be imposed at a time not of our own choosing and by circumstances we cannot possibly foresee or control.

I'm happy for the thought and preparation that has gone into Ryan’s latest budget proposal. But it only represents a step toward a slightly cheaper big government in a time when what is needed is a return to limited government we can actually afford.

Barack Obama - The Illegitimate Incompetent President

There is a video advertisement that is making its rounds on the Internet this week. It caught my eye this morning, and I think this one man, an immigrant entrepreneur, sums up the differences in the two paths we have before us as a country. He states the case brilliantly:



I've done a lot of research, reading and observing since that November day in Grant Park in Chicago, when Barack Hussein Obama II ascended to the presidency. Like most Americans, I was caught up in the emotion of the moment - America's first black president. What a great day for freedom-loving people. It said a lot that we could set aside our differences and come together after a national election and peacefully agree to take a new path toward Hope and Change.

America was tired of war. The economy had tanked. Fear was everywhere. Would the $700 Billion TARP legislation just passed by both houses of Congress be enough to save the world from financial oblivion? We looked to our new national leadership. We believed, we wanted to believe, we needed to believe.

However, the last four years have proven to be a sham, a fraud, and an illegitimate seizure of Constitutional protections that have been the bulwark of the Republic since our founding.

With control of both houses of Congress in an epic election with political reversals of fortunes, the pendulum swung in favor of Democrats. The Republicans had proven in the end to be reckless big-government spenders just like their counterparts. They put up a weak ticket in McCain and Palin. Sarah Palin has parlayed her fifteen minutes of fame into a celebrity career that continues to insult our intelligence. She was interesting for the full fifteen minutes we were first introduced to her, but her interests were never to get into the arena where she was ill-suited as a national candidate. Any thinking person would not have intentionally picked her to be one heartbeat away from the presidency, especially as the Number Two to an aging Senator. So, the 2008 election was doomed from the outset and opened the way for Obama.

BHO managed to crush the Clintonistas in the long, drawn-out primary (no small feat, I might add, and we forget how long that took to declare the winner for the Democrat nomination). The Internet is alive with conspiracy theories about how Obama got there in the first place. Here's another summation. Some have even said Barack Obama is gay and murders happened to cover it up. Just do a Google search for "first unconstitutional president" and see what you find. I'll reserve comment on all of that.

What interests me most is the aftermath of the election of 2010. It also was historic. It was a complete and utter "shellacking" as President Obama characterized it. His policies were resoundingly rejected by the American electorate. With two years to do anything he chose to do, to tackle any of the more urgent agenda items - the debt, the deficit spending, the need for entitlement reform, repairing the economy - instead he shoved the biggest costliest entitlement program in the history of the world, Obamacare, through both houses of Congress, adding one lie upon another to his narrative about its benefits for the American people.

The culmination of the lies was in the Affordable Healthcare Law being UPHELD by the SCOTUS. They found in the majority opinion, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, that Obamacare did in fact impose taxes upon the American public. Hardest hit, according to the CBO, would be the "middle class." Their estimate as they continue to count the costs, now approaches $2.2 Trillion when fully implemented. And we continue to hear, "I did not raise taxes on the middle class." Remember when President Obama in his SOTU address promised, "I will not sign the healthcare bill if it adds one dime to the deficit?"

The American people can often be fooled, it seems, but they will not forever remain stupid. They know a phony when they see one. Speaker Nancy Pelosi was de-throned as the Speaker of the House, but Harry Reid remained as the majority leader in the Senate by a slimmer margin than before. I documented the results and drew some conclusions at the time.

Since that epic turnaround, things have ground to a halt. The legislative branch of government has been rendered completely ineffective. The balance of power has left them emasculated and historically unpopular with Americans nationwide. The House has proposed a boat load of legislation to reverse the effects of the first two years of the Obama presidency. Each measure has died in the Reid-controlled Senate. Stalemate. Round One. Mission accomplished to stop the reckless spending. However, the job is still incomplete. In order to repeal Obamacare it will take enough votes in the Senate.

What is needed next is another gamble, another leap of faith. This time around, the nation imperiled as never before by the reality of our fiscal crisis, stagnant economic growth, the resurgence of al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood in the Middle East, and mounting debt and deficits, can we as a people reverse course again and have any hope to turn things over to the Republicans? Will they banish their tax and spend tendencies once and for all? Will they have the will power to exercise power wisely? Can they be trusted?

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan

Enter Mitt Romney. He survived a brutal primary season, vanquished all the pretenders, and now is poised to capture the presidency in less than thirty days. The momentum shift has been discernible, even by the liberal pundits who have begrudgingly admitted their man's defeat to Romney in the first debate. Most who are honest brokers have even admitted their disappointment at Joe Biden's debate performance last week against Paul Ryan. It seems, as it always does in close elections, that Americans are willing to take the risk. The preponderance of polling in the last few days suggests a sea change is coming to complete the take-back of the reins that began in 2010.

What remains ahead is first securing the victory on November 6th. It's really the only "poll" that counts. I predict a landslide for Romney. Why? It has little to do with Barack Obama's ethnicity, his country of origin, or his birth certificate. No, instead, it has everything to do with his illegitimacy as a leader of the free world. Further, the one thing a poll can never measure is the collective common sense of the American voter. Obama has had four years to make his case, and all he does is run from his record. Anyone with a legitimate case to make for his achievements would make it, wouldn't he? Instead, his incompetency, most recently illustrated by the terrorist attack against our embassy in Benghazi and the assassination of our ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, can be framed most accurately by observing that his trip to Vegas to raise funds for his re-election campaign was more important.

The deliberate attempt by this administration to cover up the facts of that attack and mislead the American public, even the families of those who were slain, is shameful and deceitful. If they continue to assert they didn't know the facts at the time, they only add to the narrative of their complete ineptitude and reckless disregard for the truth. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have now engaged in finger-pointing. Determined not to destroy her chances for another possible run in 2016 with the taint of failure at Benghazi being laid at her doorstep, the Clintonistas are unsheathing the knives against the president. Once again, they have put on a full display of shameful and deceitful incompetence.

So the only logical conclusion a rational citizen of America could draw from all this seems to be the one that is now inescapable: Rather than vote for another four years of failed policies, this time around let's all gather together and vote for competency. Isn't it interesting how everyone seems to have set aside their religious differences, and are now united in defeating Barack Obama? The Republicans have a Mormon and a Catholic at the top of their ticket. Would you have predicted that a year ago? I certainly did not.

Mitt Romney may be rightly criticized for being a lame politician, as he has been many times in the last several years, but you may not have the luxury of criticizing him for his lack of willingness to offer himself and Paul Ryan as the only competent solution to all the big tasks ahead. They seem to be the only adults in the room. You can hammer them all you want politically, but they are the big boys here.

They're poised to take on the mother of all turnarounds. They need all our faith and prayers after they collect our votes.

Joe Biden - The Laughing "Jackass"

I am grieved this morning at all the characterizations of Joe Biden, the Vice-President of the United States of America, as a "jackass." His debate performance last night was disgraceful to the high office he holds. At a time when America, filled with ADULT voters and perhaps ready now more than ever before for an ADULT conversation about the serious issues of the day, we get this instead:




If you want four more years of THAT, and you're still undecided about who to vote for, I appeal to the adult within each of you.

Here's the abysmal truth about the Obama administration:

23 million either un- or under-employed, 49 million on food stamps, 15% living at poverty level, $6 Trillion in additional debt, complete denial of the national security threats we face as a nation, no attention to detail on threat assessments from the intelligence community, no urgency to stand beside Israel in the face of their existential threat from Iran, the grandest and most costly lie in American history in Obamacare, nearly 1,000 executive orders to bypass Congress, no history of working across the aisles in Congress. . .

the list is much longer than this. . . did I mention this administration has failed to submit a budget to Congress in four years that was competent enough to garner even ONE vote in both houses? FOUR YEARS, NO BUDGET. There's a connection here that shouldn't be hard to make.

and all of this draws guffaws and demagoguery through political debate tricks from our Vice-President? REALLY? We can do better than this.

On November 6th this shall all be overthrown in a silent, bloodless coup d'etat in the quiet sanctuary of the voting booth one vote at a time.

10 Most Mentioned Lines from the RNC

Here are the ten most mentioned lines lines we found from the 2012 GOP convention, ranked by social media mentions provided by Topsy:

1. “I would just like to say something, ladies and gentlemen. Something that I think is very important. It is that, you, we — we own this country.” – Clint Eastwood, 6947 mentions

2. “President Obama promised to begin to slow the rise of the oceans and heal the planet. MY promise…is to help you and your family.” – Mitt Romney, 5890 mentions

3. “The greatest threat to Medicare is Obamacare, and we’re going to stop it.” – Paul Ryan, 5,363 mentions

4. “Real leaders don’t follow polls. Real leaders change polls.” – Chris Christie, 5259 mentions

5. “College graduates should not have to live out their 20s in their childhood bedrooms, staring up at fading Obama posters and wondering when they can move out and get going with life.” – Paul Ryan, 4,395 mentions

6. “Politicians are employees of ours.” – Clint Eastwood, 3,657 mentions

7. “When the world needs someone to do the really big stuff, you need an American.” – Mitt Romney, 3,386 mentions

8. “They believe in teacher’s unions. We believe in teachers.” – Chris Christie, 3,045 mentions

9. “Let’s get this done.” – Paul Ryan, 2,744 mentions

10. “I haven’t cried that hard since I found out that there is 23 million unemployed people in this country.” – Clint Eastwood, 2,673 mentions

* * *

So how does Barack Obama respond in his reaction to the RNC? He says he heard no new ideas by anyone all week long. THAT statement is hysterical, compared to Mr. Big New Bold Ideas, himself:

When the Choice is Placed Before You - CHOOSE WELL

From time to time I hear apocalyptic predictions of America's demise due to the overhang of our national debt. To be sure, it is out of control, and it must be reduced. However, we still have time to take action before it is irreversibly too late and we won't be able to do much about it.

I also hear those who would have you believe that we are "owned" by China because they hold all our debt. This is simply not true. The sad reality is that the U.S. Treasury (that means us as taxpayers) holds the lion's share of the $16 Trillion U.S. debt.

As a world region, Asia owns only 20 percent of U.S. federal debt, with China holding less than 10 percent ($1.3 trillion) and Japan owning approximately 6 percent ($882 billion).

American citizens and now, unfortunately, the Federal Reserve are the primary holders of U.S. federal debt. The U.S. urgently needs to get its fiscal house in order. It has too much debt, period. The relatively minor share of it owned by China is not the problem.

I took careful note this last week for signs of the approaching financial apocalypse. I heard nothing but hope and optimism for the future from Mitt Romney. Please take a minute to read the full text of his acceptance speech here. Paul Ryan offered a sober warning that time is running out. That was about it. The reason there is still time is that America is still the last best hope for stability in the world. Where else would the world invest? Our debt instruments are still relatively cheap, and that's why the obligations to pay keep piling up. When there are no buyers left for our debt offered at auction each week, the Federal Reserve will be the last buyer standing and it scoops it up and tucks it away for a future day of reckoning. We've just got to reverse that trend before the clock runs out. I've said it before, and I will continue to remind us that we do not have a debt problem as much as we have an unrestrained spending problem.

We simply must resolve to stop spending money we don't have. Economic growth will solve the problem, so that's why you've been hearing that the American economy will come roaring back to life when the right policies are put into place by the next Romney/Ryan administration.

What are the right policies? Here are some side by side comparisons to get us started:

Asia accounts for more than half the world’s population. Ironically, in that part of the world freedom and tyranny live side by side. So do economic prosperity and poverty. It isn't much different there than it is right here in America in that regard.

East and South Asia have some of the best places in the world to do business. Conversely, they also have some of the worst. Within the United States, the same is true also. Some states are more "business friendly" than others. Utah increasingly is seen as one of the best places in America to do business. Why? Because of its policies to encourage business development.

Asia is home to some of the most unstable, dangerous nations in the world, like North Korea. But it is also home to some of the most steady and reliable, like the "real" Korea.

It is also home to the only country in the world capable of emerging as a peer competitor for global American influence – the People’s Republic of China.

Here's what the debt picture looks like in reality today:

Given this current snapshot, we must ask ourselves what the "right policies" are for America to move forward. That's the Obama campaign slogan - "FORWARD." However, nothing this administration has done for the past four years suggests it will take us forward in the next four.

Here are some things to think about what it will take to restore America to its leadership role in the world:

We're down to about two months left in this presidential election season. Americans are facing a historic moment in time. The contrasting choice between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama could not be more well-defined and clear. Only the American people have the power to change the trajectory of the next few years. They will decide in this election what the role of the federal government will be in their individual lives, and they DO have that power.

The Republicans gathered in Tampa last week to begin framing their desire to have that debate with the Democrats who will gather in Charlotte this coming week. They raised a number of issues screaming for definitive solutions and policies that will impact us for years to come. You heard story after story last week about how up from nothing Americans realized the hope of their existence and prospered under the hope offered by the American dream.

Energy: America needs to stop talking and start doing to end energy subsidies and restore a free market in the energy sector. We can and we should develop our own domestic energy resources in an environmentally responsible way. There are literally trillions of cubic feet underground begging to be tapped to end our dependency on foreign oil.

School choice: Chris Christie said it well, I thought - "They are for teachers' unions, we're for teachers." The federal government needs to get out of the union business, and start focusing on the students by offering them and their parents more choices. The best way to serve the needs of a diverse population is to give families the freedom to choose a school — public, private, charter, or home school — a choice that best fits their children’s needs.

Free trade: The best way to create high-quality jobs in America is to promote free trade among nations. A free flow of goods, services and technology investments across national borders enhances our ability to compete in the world, and that starts with providing markets for our best and brightest to compete in overseas and here at home.

The federal budget: There might be no one in America today better equipped than Paul Ryan to tackle the federal budget. It is complex, tricky and in every sense a balancing act among a vast array of programs and entitlements begging to be addressed, but by picking Ryan, Mitt Romney has signaled he is ready to take it on and get it under control. To preserve the American dream requires reforming major entitlement programs, permanently balancing the budget, and reducing the national debt.

Tax reform: Here again, a major overhaul of tax policy has been discussed for decades, but little progress has been made. This, like no other policy, has been a historical stalemate. Control of the Senate and the House is paramount in achieving meaningful reform in this area. America’s families and small businesses need predictable and permanent tax relief. The uncertainty must be eliminated. A tax cut here and there isn’t enough; we need fundamental tax reform. A tax system that is simple and fair would spur economic growth and protect those at the bottom of the income ladder. Lots of proposals have been floated. Now is the time to pick a few of the best and act upon them.

Repealing Obamacare: The Heritage Foundation lays out five well-reasoned positions on why it needs to be repealed. Obamacare doesn’t stop with government intrusion into your relationship with your doctor. It also raises taxes, adds to the U.S. deficit, and attacks religious and personal freedoms. Forget for a moment the stated reason it was first enacted - to give everyone in society access to affordable medical care. The hard truth is that Obamacare CANNOT and will NOT deliver on that promise because the math is unsustainable and now that we actually know what is in the bill it is nothing more than a massive tax increase at a time in our history when we can least afford it.

Reforming Medicare: Medicare reform is not just a desirable goal. It is an absolute necessity. The sleight of hand imposed upon Americans for years about its sustainability is nothing more than a magician's accounting trick and it is bankrupting not only the Medicare program but American itself. Ryan's proposal is simple in its context - to keep the promises we've made to seniors it was designed to help by giving them more choice and control over their health care decisions and guarantee better access to quality care. To do that, workers younger than age 55 will have to be introduced to the reforms of the program in order to sustain it. That will mean higher premiums for them and a reduction in benefits. Means testing will also likely be introduced. Those are the hard facts associated with Medicare that the leaders of both political parties have been loathe to discuss with taxpayers. Paul Ryan is the man for these times.

In Charlotte next week, the Democrats will attempt to muddy the waters on these direct and forthright policies. They will beg America for "just four more years" so their policies (or lack thereof) can get them through one more election cycle. They will not be successful in winning that argument with the American people, who are ready and willing to have the adult conversation about their future as Americans.

I am a terrible prognosticator when it comes to predicting which way the political winds will blow, but I've got a feeling. That feeling tells me this election will be not only a turning point in American history. It will be a sea change with major implications on the future we will choose by the leaders we elect in November.



Even 82 year-old Clint Eastwood sees it coming. Among the other things he said that garnered more commentary in the media, were these words to remind us of who WE are, an appeal to everyone in America who will wield a ballot on November 6th:

"I would just like to say something, ladies and gentlemen. Something that I think is very important. It is that, you, WE - WE own this country.

(APPLAUSE)

"WE - WE own it. It is not you owning it, and not politicians owning it. Politicians are employees of ours.

(APPLAUSE)

"And - so - they are just going to come around and beg for votes every few years. It is the same old deal. But I just think it is important that you realize that you’re the best in the world. Whether you are a Democrat or Republican or whether you’re libertarian or whatever, you are the best. And WE should not ever forget that. And when somebody does not do the job, WE got to let them go."

Either the leaders we elect in November will guide the country even further down the unsustainable path of  "progressivism," thus assuring our eventual demise by continuing the ruinous agenda of borrowing and deficit spending, or we will choose leaders who can begin the necessary work along the long, slow path leading to a turnaround to invigorate the principled policies of our American founders. I don't know how I could lay it out more succinctly than that. We are standing at the proverbial fork in the road and we must choose one path or the other. There is no longer a middle of the road approach.

I believe the first step toward reducing our dependency upon government is to unleash the engines of economic productivity and growth. Everything else will follow in natural succession. The Reagan model of the early eighties works. We heard testimony after testimony about that this last week from successful governors who applied the model to their individual states.

• There is little doubt we will hear nothing but empty rhetoric coming out of the DNC next week. 
• Their convention will offer a stark and contrasting path forward over the cliff leading to oblivion. 
• Their failed policies of the last four years are ample testimony enough. 
• They have presided over a federal government that has acted without constitutional limits, without restrictions, and fueled solely by political expediency and fewer and fewer budgetary constraints. 
• To do what they have done without a budget for four years is not only reckless, it is patently unconstitutional. 

It appears the only day of reckoning they will face will have to be before the harsh tribunal of the disillusioned voters who put them in power in the first place. The contest boils down to about 100 counties in six or seven states, who voted in 2008 for President Obama in the glare of the bright lights, the soaring rhetoric and the glossy promises that could never be realized. They didn't know it then, but they surely must know it now.

I've already made up my mind and I'll cast a ballot for the Romney/Ryan ticket the minute my early voting ballot arrives in the mail. For me, it can't come soon enough. In its essence it boils down to who has the right policies. It has nothing to do with Mitt Romney's religion, nor Barack Obama's ethnicity. Romney summarized it best about his Mormon religion being a non-factor: "We were Mormons and growing up in Michigan; that might have seemed unusual or out of place but I really don’t remember it that way. My friends cared more about what sports teams we followed than what church we went to." And similarly, opposing Obama's policies does not make one a racist.

There are some who say they still don't know Mitt Romney and wonder if they can trust him. At the RNC he let others do the talking about his quiet deeds of kindness, compassion and caring for others, but they were not broadcast in prime time. For those stories you had to do a little digging, but here are a few. In that comparison Mitt Romney wins by a landslide. It isn't even close.

So now we are finally down to the policy discussion. This time around, we can only hope and pray the residents of those 100 counties get it right, for a simple reason:

In America today we must begin anew voluntarily, or the consequences of our indecision will be thrust upon us.

Why Paul Ryan is the Right Pick for VP

Last week, Greta Van Susteren did a nice piece for Fox News about 42 year-old House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan. She provided background on the Janesville, Wisconsin, native who has now been tapped by Mitt Romney as his running mate on the GOP ticket. They will probably run it again. Take a look at it if you get a chance.

Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan

I like Mitt Romney’s selection of Paul Ryan, because I think it sends the strongest possible signal to the country that Romney's presidency is going to be inclined to tackle some big issues with big bold ideas. Call me naive, but Paul Ryan seems to be one of a handful in Washington today willing to put forward a plan and be bold enough to attach his name to it. Romney's choice of Ryan wasn't particularly political, nor was it conventional. But it does remind me of something Thomas Paine said: "Character is much easier kept than recovered.”

 It was the right choice. The mantle of leadership has already shifted from the current administration by default. Both men are men of character. The vacuum has been filled. Here's why:

I believe leadership on the tough issues in this current administration has been absent. Faced with the biggest deficits in history and the most amount of debt accumulated under one POTUS, what did we get? Silence on that, but assurance that healthcare reform costing the country trillions was paramount. Taxation as the funding mechanism for Obamacare was first denied by the Obama administration, then affirmed and upheld by the SCOTUS.

Paul Ryan advocates taking on the entitlement programs, the "automatic payments" in the budget that are killing our productivity. They are bold solutions, but much-needed answers.

Paul Ryan, doesn't do the political calculations on fallout. He's ready to have an adult conversation with America's younger workers under age 55. He's willing to say we won't change the plans your elders grew up expecting in their retirement years, but we need to talk - it simply isn't going to be that way for you. Leaders in neither party want that conversation, but Ryan does.

A conventional "kick the can down the road" approach is no longer possible. There are something like 23 million Americans unemployed or underemployed. Check the embedded national debt clock on this blog. We are approaching $16 trillion. Nobody who's serious about the future of America should be interested in the status quo any longer. Socialism has failed to deliver once again.

Balancing the budget is still on Ryan's radar. Spending money we don't have has to be arrested. Where have the Democrats under Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama been on that subject? AWOL. On the golf course, campaigning and begging for another four years to "finish the job."

President Obama, never one for a serious sit down adult conversation except with the likes of Entertainment Tonight and People Magazine, attacks their plans with lies and half-truths. Ask yourself if you've ever heard anything except "we need to tax the wealthy so they pay their fair share." He offers nothing in rebuttal, then blames a do-nothing Congress in stalemate.

It seems the president’s plan for Medicare is bankruptcy. Did you hear the part about Mr. Obama raiding $716 billion from Medicare in order to pay for Obamacare? Then he denies it. But the plan is simple - you take it from Medicare reimbursements to hospitals and private insurance companies.

Contrast that with a President Romney, who would repeal Obamacare on Day One, including the cuts to Medicare.

To oppose Mr. Obama now seems to be linked with racism. However, what this president has done is fail to show leadership on these core issues. It's his policies that have crippled economic growth and led to the worst recovery in 70 years. And THAT has nothing to do with his ethnic origins.

Here's what his policies have produced:

• The unemployment rate has been above 8 percent for 42 consecutive months.
• The average price of gasoline has more than doubled.
• The national debt has increased by more than $5 trillion.
• Median household income has dropped by more than $4,000.
• One in 7 Americans is on food stamps — a record high.

I defy you explain away that economic record on the basis of race. If an old white guy from the GOP were to fail to lead the country by producing similar results, who would blame him for just being an old white guy?

A recent Rasmussen poll disclosed that just 14 percent of Americans — an all-time low — think today’s children will be better off than their parents’ generation. Does anyone in their right mind in the other 86% cast a ballot for Barack Obama in November?

Here's the deal - I am not naive enough to think that Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan can lead this country back into the days of fiscal sunshine and clover anytime soon. We are in deep, deep doo-doo. Republicans and Democrats are to blame over a long period of time. The socialist agenda has now fully played out and it isn't working. Everyone used to think America could produce a better life for succeeding generations. That core value is fading fast.

A second term for Mr. Obama, one in which he would no longer have to face the wrath of voters, would mean an attempt by him to double down on higher taxes, more wasteful spending and an even greater dependency on big government. It's our last chance to end this unsustainable path we're on. Does anyone doubt his attacks on job creators and small business owners would escalate rather than abate? This is a president who reminded us all recently, "You didn’t build that.” He believes government is the dispensing machine for all good things American. He does not believe our rights and freedoms come from God.

Here's what I know for sure. Barack Obama cannot lead us out of the economic wilderness we are wandering in currently. He's proven to everyone now that he's undeserving of another bite of that apple.

Here's what we know about Mitt Romney. He's worked most of his life in the private sector. He understands how wealth is created because he's an example of a practitioner in free markets and he's succeeded. He's a turnaround expert, and what are we looking to hire in the White House this November if it isn't a turnaround guy? Turning this mess around is going to be a prodigious task, but clearly Barack Obama is NOT that guy.

In Paul Ryan, Romney now has a bold reform partner with expertise in the federal budget. Who do I like better as the captains of the ship of state to jump-start the economy and restore America’s greatness? Um, wait a minute, let me think a minute. . .

We have to become a nation that is once again financially responsible. I have little confidence that goal can be achieved under President Obama in another four years.

The Romney-Ryan ticket, I believe, has a better understanding that a strong America is dependent upon a financially sound America. I believe the generals of the Joint Chiefs, who say our biggest security threat is our profligate spending and debt. It weakens a strong defense. Put America back on a sound financial footing, and with that result America will be enabled once again to create new jobs and more take home pay for all Americans.

Paul Ryan can prioritize government spending. It's what he does best. Getting the AAA credit rating back for America might at least be possible again. The rating agencies are waiting for a serious sign that American politicians can get their act together. They selected against this POTUS and his failed leadership.

Prioritizing spending is something Democrats are loathe to do when they feel a misplaced moral obligation to the whole society to redistribute wealth and they can't seem to figure out how to say "No" to anyone. You can call the Romney/Ryan approach "trickle-down economics" if you prefer, but no one in the private sector where I've worked my whole life was ever hired by someone who was dependent on the government dole. Instead, they were innovators, entrepreneurs, risk takers and rugged individualists. They BUILD stuff, Mr. President, unlike you.

Only days after Barack Obama was sworn into office in 2009, I seem to remember when he famously boasted that if his policies didn’t turn the economy around in three years, “then there’s going to be a one-term proposition.” Conveniently, he's either forgotten he said it or doesn't believe it.

More than once in recent months, Mitt Romney has boldly asserted, "Well, Mr. President, we're here to collect on that promise." Romney may ultimately not be able to turn it around because of the sheer weight of the problem.

But this much is certain - the Obama/Biden ticket has PROVEN they can't do it. At least with the Romney/Ryan ticket we can reinvest in the one thing that's been lacking the last four years:

HOPE AND CHANGE!

The Romney/Ryan Plan to Reform Medicare

Here's the truth about the Romney/Ryan plan to reform Medicare (and it's not what BHO/Biden are telling seniors it is).



Paul Ryan calmly and perfunctorily lays out the case for the need for reform of Medicare on his own terms. He will not be easily redefined by Obama's lies about what he intends to do:



Here's another example of what this POTUS is doing this year in his campaign. Here he is in 2008 as a candidate accusing his Republican opponents of doing EXACTLY what he is doing right now:



Out of his own mouth! It's simply stunning. I used to think Americans could discern truth from error. I hope they still can.

Here's a priceless cartoon that illustrates what we're talking about:

Here's what Mitt Romney said today. There are exactly 84 days left until we get a change of direction that will help put America back on the right track.

Paul Ryan - there's an app for that

Mitt Romney announces Paul Ryan as his running mate in November

I returned from three days out of range in the high Uintas to learn about the Congressman Paul Ryan (R-MI) pick as Mitt Romney's running mate. So much for my high-tech app on my iPhone and all the good that did me. . . It's obvious Rupert Murdoch liked the choice a lot (and he doesn't tweet much either).

I actually like this choice a lot too. My first impressions - it signals to the world that Mitt Romney is really serious about budgets and entitlement reform. There's another oh, by the way, fact that interests me - this is the first ever Mormon/Catholic pairing of two presidential election running mates in history. Ryan is only the second Catholic GOP candidate to make it to the national ticket.

In sports a lot is said about "chemistry." You've heard it again and again during the Olympics. There's no question that there's chemistry between Ryan and Romney. It's evident when they campaign together. They share a number of things in common. Despite the twenty-plus year gap in their ages, they are both data hunters. They love numbers -- Mitt Romney from his experience in business and working with economies as both a governor and a businessman, and Paul Ryan from his lifetime in studying the budget and the economy and particularly how the legislative process and our federal budget gets put together.

I've heard Paul Ryan tell the stories about when he was in high school and other kids were doing what most teenagers do, he was reading the federal budget for fun. Seriously, you can't make this up - that's who the guy IS at his core. And one of the things Mitt Romney finds particularly appealing is, Ryan is a very articulate, glib, enthusiastic guy. He can take really complex economic and budget issues and make them understandable in clear, concise language that voters can understand. He explanations don't get lost in the kind of legislative speak that you often get on Capitol Hill. And frankly, he's able to put a little more salsa sauce into it than Romney does.

This pick clearly brings this debate right where it should be focused now between the left and right. The remaining months will be about THE BUDGET finally. It will become the Romney agenda as supported by Ryan with all of his principles. That debate will be a more substantive one than a lot of the back-biting and name-calling that we've seen in the past few weeks.

Romney has sometimes been knocked as the "stiff." Paul Ryan will become the Energizer Bunny. In the last  seven terms in Congress, he rocketed to the top of Republican politics. He has become the youngest chairman of the House Budget Committee ever. He has left an indelible mark on the Republican party with the Ryan budget and his bold proposals for Medicare reforms, etc. All have really energized conservatives and Republicans. And likewise, it's also angered and energized a lot of liberals and Democrats, who are as violently opposed to it as Republicans and conservatives are enthusiastically for it. This election is now set for the precise trajectory I would have hoped for months ago. The choices could not be more clear cut.

Historically, and by Constitutional dictum, all spending bills must originate in the House of Representatives. Under the Nancy Pelosi Democrat-controlled House during Obama's first two years, no budget was presented for consideration in the House. When the BHO budget was submitted it was laughed out of contention unanimously by both parties.

In 2010, when control of the House switched to the Republicans under Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), the budget chairman in the House was named and he actually presented a serious budget that called for major reforms of entitlement programs, real spending cuts, and a plan to reduce and eventually eliminate deficit spending in a reasonable amount of time. For two consecutive years the Ryan Plan, as it came be called, was passed in the House and stalled in the the Democrat-controlled Senate.

All of which means this country has been operating without a budget in place for four years. The consequences are becoming obvious - deficit spending and debt has risen dramatically with no end in sight.

The creeping progressive agenda is something Paul Ryan deeply knew and cared about, and was actually opposing vigorously, for years in the Congress.

Click here for the complete transcript of an interview with Glenn Beck in 2010, where Paul Ryan says the following:

"Where we raise our family, 35 miles from Madison, I grew up hearing about this stuff. This stuff came from these German intellectuals to Madison ‑ University of Wisconsin - and sort of out there from the beginning of the last century. So this is something we are familiar with where I come from. It never sat right with me. And as I grew up, I learned more about the founders and reading the Austrians and others that this is really a cancer because it basically takes the notion that our rights come from God and nature and turns it on its head and says, no, no, no, no, no, they come from government, and we here in government are here to give you your rights and therefore ration, redistribute and regulate your rights. It’s a complete affront of the whole idea of this country and that is to me what we as conservatives, or classical liberals if you want to get technical."

And there you have it folks - a capsule summary any thinking American can digest to invigorate and focus this campaign on where it is headed into November 6th. If you want to know what really makes a man like Paul Ryan tick, here it is fleshed out a bit more from the same interview:

"They are leading us to a social welfare state, cradle‑to‑grave society where they create a culture of dependency on the government, not on oneself. It is meant to replace the American idea. And the reason I’m doing a lot of these speeches ‑‑ the reason I’m talking about Hegel and Faber and Bismarck, you know, and what those people stood for and what they did and said and all their disciples, you know, in America is because I really believe we’ve got to have a debate and a political realignment fast because we will win the debate now. We are a center‑right country. But if they succeed in moving us faster down the tipping point where more Americans are dependent on the government than upon themselves, where a debt crisis sparked money entitlement explosion brings us to, you know, a really tough fiscal situation, then down the road we may not win that referendum and so that is why I’m trying to, you know, do what I can from my position in congress to sound the alarm bells on what this agenda really means, what this philosophy’s all about and how we need to have a referendum in America in real elections to untangle this mess they created and prevent us from reaching this tipping point where we are a social welfare state, cradle‑to‑grave society, dependent on the government that lulls us into lies of complicity and dependency versus the America idea of, you know, making the most of your life, equal opportunity, equal natural rights. You know, those are the things that got us where we are and that’s why I put this roadmap plan out there. I introduced it three years ago. I put a new version out in January. You can go to my website, Americanroadmap.org. It is a very specific economic and fiscal plan. It’s a piece of legislation that says there is an alternative to this progressivist vision for America. There is a way to reapply and reclaim the founding principles in America and still get America back and make this century another American Century appeared that’s why I’ve been, you know, speaking from the hilltop. It’s not popular and it’s ‑‑ and for my party, we can’t afford to screw up again. But we’ve got to get people to stop being worried or afraid of taking on this debate and that’s what I’m simply trying to do."

So if I am right in my assessment, we will actually have two men atop the ticket of the GOP this year who are serious about taking on the tough problems we face as a nation and doing something to correct the illegitimate course we have been pursuing this past four years.

There is only one way Romney and Ryan can lose this debate, and that is if the other side - the BHO/Joe Biden ticket - refuses to debate the case on its merits. There is one thing a radical left-wing extremist ideologue can't stand, and it's the one thing both Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are really, really good at:

MATH!

Obama's First Term - The Record

Take a look at these updated numbers (July 2012), and ask yourself the obvious question: Is this the POTUS who will lead us out of the economic quagmire with his failed policies?

Paul Ryan, the House Budget Chairman, adds this insight to the failed policies of this administration:

"The President recently suggested that a central government — not individuals — deserves the credit for building successful businesses. This sentiment makes for terrible economics, but also reveals a confused morality. In a free community, everyone co-operates by voluntarily offering unique gifts: some invent, some invest, others labor, or sell while customers reward the best producers and providers by buying their products and services. . . . A free economy and strong communities are the best means to reward effort with justice, to promote upward mobility, and to build solidarity among citizens. The President’s vision of a government-centered society — reflected in both his troubling rhetoric and his failed policies — belittles fair rewards for labor and enterprise."

What's the Plan to Save Medicare?

Here's by far the best explanation of what's being proposed (or not proposed) to save Medicare "as we know it." Those who are kicking Medicare like a football around the political backyard in Washington these days are focused one thing only -- winning the 2012 election as though there aren't serious problems that need addressing. Beware those with no plan. Right now, Paul Ryan is the only one offering a plan. Marco Rubio (R-FL) explains this issue better than anyone I've listened to this year.

Give him a minute to explain:

The Great Big Fat Lie

Several months ago I attempted to explain what a ludicrous idea taxing the wealthy was to balance the budget and redistribute the wealth among the needy and worthy poor members of society. It's classic liberal drivel to pick an example of a poor person or family, then exploit their dire circumstances for political gain.

Last week, President Obama addressed the nation. He trashed the Paul Ryan 2012 budget on national television, putting forward instead a plan to tax the wealthy Americans, demanding that they ante up and pay their fair share to help us get out of debt and reduce the deficits.

I am appalled at the audacity, the boldness and the bald face lies this man tells. Either he has no one in his administration who can do the basic math, or he intentionally attempts to deceive. Whichever it is, the facts simply do not support his assumptions.

Take a few minutes and watch.



What do you think? Can we restore fiscal sanity to Washington by merely taxing the rich? If you need help with the answer, check out the opinion of this writer in The Wall Street Journal. The Cato Institute sets the facts straight in President Obama's attack against the wealthy.

We don't have a taxation problem in America, we have a spending problem. Better get it right, all you politicians, the clock is ticking with the S&P announcement this week that America is on a negative credit watch that could result in a downgrade of America's "AAA" rating two years from now.

The 2011 Budget Pie Debate

I've always believed a good picture is worth a thousand words. That's why this illustration is so perfect. It requires no further explanation (click to enlarge):

To be clear, this budget pie represents the debate over Obama's 2011 budget, and only yesterday the House introduced the 2012 budget for consideration. Neither the Republicans or the Democrats in their debate over which amount of budget cuts to adopt -- $61 Billion or $33 Billion -- is really serious yet about budget, debt and deficit reform. Those numbers are well represented here by a few crumbs.

Obama with full majorities in both houses of Congress did not even submit a budget in 2010, and the government has been operating on temporary "continuing resolutions" ever since. That is a losing strategy no one believes is sustainable, at least among conservatives.

I know the average Joe American doesn't focus on this stuff on a daily basis, which is exactly why we keep kicking the can down the road with no one stepping up to the plate and telling Americans the truth. I maintain anyone with an average education can look at this picture and completely understand what's at stake here.

But answer me this: How in blazes can the POTUS, Barack Obama, seriously believe people are this stupid? Would we ever sit still for a leader who presents a budget with a straight face and tries to tell us we can somehow conjure up 43% over and above what we're going to bring in?

And I'm not just picking on Obama -- Dick Cheney was advocating paying for wars out of money we didn't have as a nation and telling us, "Deficits don't matter." Bush forever tainted his legacy with TARP and bailouts that set the stage for what followed in multiples that have staggered us. And now explain to me how people who are screaming, "It just ain't so, Mr. President," can be considered "extremists?" If that's "extreme," then let's all enlist in the extremist category.

Tell me why it seems so hard to get it figured out among elected representatives of the people who are sick and tired of politics as usual?



Kudos to Paul Ryan, Rand Paul, Mike Lee and others who are telling it straight!

Who Are The "Extremists?"

The Washington blame game over the budget continues, including the Democrat Senate caucus giving instruction to Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) to keep referring to the Tea Party as "extremists," and the conservative Republicans trying to rein in the profligate spending. It's making politics a rousing game with lots of sharp elbows being thrown these days.

Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI)

Today, Paul Ryan (R-WI) the Congressional Budget Committee Chair rolled out his version of the 2012 fiscal year budget that finally gets serious about budget cuts. He's calling for $6.2 TRILLION in cuts in the next few years, while the Democrats continue to bump along reluctantly agreeing to tens of billions. I'm not one who believes the Republicans are blameless in amassing the debt, but I'm expecting them to lead the way in reducing it.

I have a pretty good idea who's listening to the electorate and who's not.

Meanwhile, the present occupant of the White House officially announced that he's running for re-election (just in case there's anyone out there who might be entertaining thoughts he isn't). Time Magazine offers five reasons why he's unbeatable, and will easily win re-election. The rumors are that he will spend over $1 billion in the next nineteen months, making it the most expensive run for the presidency in the history of the Republic. The willingness without reservation to spend that much on the race should give pause to anyone who seriously thinks this is a president who is taking his job seriously. The battle lines could not be more clearly drawn than they are right now.

Senator Mike Lee (R-UT)

Here's an enlightening interview with Mike Lee (R-UT) on Fox News the other night -- you be the judge about who's being the extremist here. And here's another interesting look at the uneasy truce and working relationship over the Balanced Budget Amendment between Utah's two senators, Hatch and Lee from Politico. Hatch could claim he's been at this thing since Mike was in diapers, and he'd be right, but Hatch is the insider's insider and viewed with suspicion among Utah's conservative base, even after his long track record (36 years) in the Senate.

Is Hatch part of the problem of old-Washington politics that put us here in the first place, or is he really a pea in the same conservative pod as Mike Lee? It's Hatch who has to define himself, interestingly, not newcomer Mike Lee. To date Mike is withholding his endorsement of Hatch. Wise move. After a viable replacement candidate surfaces and the Republican nominating process plays out at convention next spring, we may well understand why Mike is so reluctant to endorse Hatch now. Let's all keep the powder dry until we see who pops up on the horizon to oppose Hatch.

I'm thinking Mike Lee and Paul Ryan are about as mainstream as it gets. The more they speak, the less extreme they seem. These are guys who are serious about putting the squeeze on spending for a monstrosity federal government. It's still not too late to begin downsizing, but it will take an iron political will fueled and forged in the furnace of affliction by the people.

If you think it's extreme to put America on a fiscally reckless path at breakneck speed leading toward a bankrupt precipice then re-elect Obama.

If, on the other hand you want to side with the "extremists" who are trying to put this country back on track, then make other plans.

I know where I stand, do you know where you stand?

Why Obamacare is NOT Reform

This is by far the most sensible and scholarly treatment of this topic I have seen to date.  I have become convinced the way to spend less money on entitlement programs is not to guarantee more government spending. 

It's like bailing out a sinking row boat by scooping up buckets from the ocean and dumping it into the boat.

James C. Capretta, a former White House budget adviser on health care to President George W. Bush, will present the paper for the Galen Institute at an event on Capitol Hill with Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), one of the Republican Party’s rising stars, and Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a top conservative economist.  Ryan has come up with an alternative plan to be presented at the event.

Even as many on Capitol Hill are talking about addressing Social Security spending, Capretta writes in the 19-page paper that Medicare is the real problem.

Most Democrats and Republicans agree, Capretta says, that the 30 to 35 million seniors in Medicare’s fee-for-service (FFS) insurance program are “the engine … pulling the rest of the health system down the tracks at an accelerated and dangerous rate.”

Most FFS participants pay nothing out of their own pockets for health care, and hospitals and doctors are incentivized to provide them with as many services and tests as can be loosely justified.

But Capretta says in the paper that the Obama health bill is not reform because it attempts to stop price inflation and inefficient care through top-down government control rather than bottom-up consumer demand.

When government displaces individual choice, the seeds of dissent will be harvested.  That's why this alternative has some appeal.  Capretta goes on to say in this paper that Paul Ryan’s plan would move Medicare recipients from defined benefits to defined contributions, in which “cost-conscious consumers choose between competing insurers and delivery systems based on price and quality.”

“Beneficiaries would get to decide which insurance plan they want to enroll in. If the premium were more than the amount they are entitled to from Medicare, then they would pay the difference. If it were less, they would keep all of the savings,” Capretta says.

“Millions of otherwise passive Medicare participants would become active, cost-conscious consumers of insurance and alternative models for securing needed medical services,” Capretta writes. “Cost cutting innovation would be rewarded, not punished as it is today.”

Would it surprise you if I told you I like this market-based approach a lot more?

I have another brother, Jon, who is likewise a healthcare administrator in a small doctor-owned practice.  His take on all this muddle is that IF the Congress is turned around in November, there won't be enough votes to fund Obamacare going forward so why worry? 

That's the biggest two-letter word in the alphabet.