Paul Ryan - Government did not help?

That's why he picked a running mate who did have a lot of foreign policy experience.

And both Ryan and Romney have zero foreign policy experience.... Obama at least chose a VP who did. Hmmm...when did generals become economy experts? Although, if I remember correctly that was stated in response to the deadlock in congress nearly sending us over the economic cliff...wasn't Ryan a big part of that?

archer wrote: Way to go Bill, a Republican can do no wrong as long as a Democrat has done the same. The difference is that it's the Republicans who whine about career government employees and politicians, not Democrats. Yet here they are singing the praises of a man who has been in govt most of his adult life and has very minimal experience in the private sector. That spells hypocrisy to me.

Most, though certainly not all, of the complaints I have heard regarding career politicians has to do with Senators who are elected to 6 year terms, not the Representatives who are elected to 2 year ones. The other objection I have seen raised is that the citizens of the States were denied by the federal courts of their ability to choose to limit the number of terms of their own representatives to the general Congress by State statute. That doesn't seem right to me. If the good citizens of Colorado wish to limit the number of terms that their own representatives to the general Congress can serve consecutively, why should that be any business of the federal government? Those representatives represent the citizens and the government of the State of Colorado. If we want to limit how many terms they may represent us over the course of their lives, that is our business and not the business of anyone who isn't a citizen of this State.

So is Ryan giving up his house seat? I'd rather see him in Congress personally.

I believe he doesnt have to give up his seat unless he becomes the VP. Of course it would be hard to campaign for VP and the house at the same time.

He's already on the ballot for District 1, that had to be done by June of this year. Given that he won the district with nearly 70% of the vote the last time around, I don't suppose that it will be too difficult for him to be elected by those constituents to serve an 8th term should Romney/Ryan be defeated in the general election. It's a long standing tradition it seems. Biden, IIRC, won reelection to his Senate seat the same day he was elected to be the VP. For whatever reason, the voters seem to reserve the job of their representative for them in the event they are unsuccessful in seeking higher offices on a fairly regular basis.

Don't know that it is worth a constitutional amendment, but I think it would be appropriate for anyone running for a different office to resign from the one they currently hold while they do so. Go big or go home, right?

archer wrote: And both Ryan and Romney have zero foreign policy experience.... Obama at least chose a VP who did. Hmmm...when did generals become economy experts? Although, if I remember correctly that was stated in response to the deadlock in congress nearly sending us over the economic cliff...wasn't Ryan a big part of that?

It's a pretty sad state of affairs when one believes that the failure to expand the credit ceiling is the tipping point regarding falling off the edge of a financial cliff. Some might argue the ever increasing frequency with which it must be done is the prime indicator that the current footing is far from stable.

Thanks PS, I really didn't know how that worked. Seems strange to be able to run for two offices, but then you can simultaneously apply for 100s of jobs. So the lucky challenger in WI gets the seat if he wins the VP?

Term Limits? Ryan is running for his 8th term. So much for throw all of the incumbents out...

I'd agree with Term limits. And balanced budgets and tax limits too!