Last night, after having dinner with a friend, we ended up, pursuant to part of our conversation, watching the first half of Excalibur, a flawed, but very (very, very) watchable movie. As a result, I missed the two “big” speeches at the Republican National Convention last night.
When I did scan the web last night, I learned that conservative bloggers andpundits, while almost unanimous in loving Ann Romney’s speech, had mixed views on Chris Christie’s. Byron York thought the New Jersey governor’s address did not succeed. Jonah Goldberg called it “a mild disappointment.”
Jennifer Rubin and John Podhoretz liked the speech, with the latter citing the governor’s failure to attack the incumbent indicated instead a suggestion
. . . that the electorate in November would turn to the Republican ticket because it understands better than politicians the depth of the country’s problems — and that only the Republicans would speak honestly about them and the need to change course before it’s too late.
Perhaps, the reason Christie highlighted his own record was to show that understanding and that even thought Republican leaders in state houses across the country face incredible obstacles to reform, but are nonetheless pushing ahead with solutions to their jurisdictions’ problems.
Christie’s goal, in short, was to warm up the audience for Paul Ryan, showing that Republicans have solutions to the nation’s fiscal problems.
In the interview with the other Republican elected to replace a Democratic governor in 2009, the National Review’s Jim Geraghty asks a question which shows not just that Republican governors have championed reforms, but that reforms has helped improve the economic situation in their states: “Completely coincidental“, he quips “that all of Obama’s national policies are only working in those Republican states, huh?” (I.e., states where Republican governors have enacted real reforms.)
“What Paul Ryan brings to the ticket”, adds that governor, Virginia’s Bob McDonnell,
is a seriousness about the incredible challenges facing America. We’re broke, and 23 million people don’t have jobs. That is a serious situation for the greatest country on earth. Paul Ryan is a serious guy who’s had a plan for balancing the budget, for reforming Medicaid and Medicare and reforming entitlements. Everything that Barack Obama doesn’t have the courage to take on, Paul Ryan’s had a plan. Even though some people haven’t liked all of the details, he’s had a plan to get there! So I think he helps immensely with that.
In this manner, Christie’s keynote address and Ryan’s selection stands in clear contradistinction to the Obama Democrats who repeat tired phrases about returning to “failed” policies of the past while accenting the verbal gaffes of an obscure Senate candidate without offering suggestions on how to improve things.
Chris Christie has shown that Republicans mean business, that they are prepared to roll up their sleeves and do the hard work of reform. Democrats, however, prefer rhetoric.
It would be nice, if our friends in the legacy media would follow up on Democratic critiques of Republican plans and ask, “Okay, now we’ve heard your critique of the GOP, please tell us what’s your plan? How do you plan to reduce the debt and protect entitlements from insolvency?”
As Jon Huntsman wrote last May, critics of Ryan’s “approach incur a moral responsibility to propose reforms that would ensure Medicare’s ability to meet its responsibilities to retirees without imposing an unaffordable tax burden on future generations of Americans.”
Politicians who criticize the Republican approach have a moral responsibility to make clear their own plans for reforms. So, instead of criticizing Chris Christie for touting what he has done in New Jersey, Democrats owe the American people the courtesy of outlining their plans for reform — instead of repeating attacks on Republicans.
While many Leftie pundits criticized Gov. Christie for not mentioning Romney til the 2nd-half of the speech…and for talking about himself…they’ve missed both the point of a Convention Keynote and Christie’s message.
– The Convention Keynote is NOT about the candidate traditionally, as the candidate hasn’t been elected by the Convention yet. It’s supposed to set the “tone” of the Convention leading to nominating a Party candidate, and for the themes of the broader 2012 Campaign-cycle for other GOP candidates in November at the Federal State and local-levels as-well.
– The point of Gov. Christie’s talking about his own record is that it demonstrates that his policies are actually-working in a Blue-Red state with fiscal challenges….and that he’s received real-world legislative support proving that his message isn’t “just talk”, and isn’t theoretical political campaign rhetoric.
Let us not forget the speakers at the convention are fiscal conservatives and social liberals/establishment republicans like Romney. I hope LGBT conservatives are not going to let their dreams/fantasies for “gay marriage” let them forget about what, to establishment republicans, are the icky issues of crony capitalism, corporate welfare, public funding of abortion, the $16,000,000,000,000.00 debt clock, the war on religions (except of course islam), “sensible gun control”, the ecroachment on the first amendment except for elites and the asault on the 4th, 10th amendments.
Forgot, “Comprehensive immigration reform”.
I thought Christie’s role was to show us what is possible on the state level. Then Ryan and Romney can tell us how to expand that success to the federal level.
I was impressed with all the speakers and the back stories.
Courtesy? It’s not a courtesy; it’s a duty. If they fail to offer their own plans, they don’t deserve to be elected. Politeness isn’t something a politician should be concerned with, in my opinion.
Rattlesnake:
THAT’S exactly why you’re one of my favorite posters here. Nicely done!
Thank you.
I watched Christie’s, Ryan’s, and Rice’s speeches tonight. I have to say that Christie did a great job and was very personable. Ryan was only so-so, not at all inspiring. But Rice’s speech blew me away. She has the capacity to equal Reagan when delivering a speech. It was so compelling and spellbounding, much like the only great President in my lifetime (and I don’t mean Obama or Carter). I don’t see how Romney can surpass hers. Too bad Romney cannot deliver a speech like Rice’s. Truly amazing.
Throwing red meat is traditionally the VP’s role. Christie was careful to ensure Ryan’s speech wouldn’t be anti-climactic, i.e. that Republicans wouldn’t be disappointed that the wrong man had been chosen a la Ford/Reagan. Christie is a very powerful speaker — he has comic timing of a trained actor and he’s able to balance eloquence with everyday speech, peppered with Jersey cred. I think he held back deliberately and was brilliant. The GOP has a very deep bench.
I missed the speeches because I was watching ‘Futurama.’ Which says everything about the differences between me and Dan.
Real reform? New Jersey is somewhere like 48th in job creation amongst all the states. What kind of miracle is he providing for people in NJ?