Ryan versus Rubio: Who's Making Better Sense?

[Valin]

Richohet:

Peter Robinson

1/3/13

 

Representative and former vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan voted in favor of the budget deal; Senator Marco Rubio voted against it. From an article in the National Journal:

 

(Snip)

 

Leave aside the reporter's obvious bias here--whereas Ryan is engaged in the serious business of governing, the prose heavy-handedly implies, Rubio is merely playing politics--which approach is most useful? Which best places the GOP in a position to do real good over the longer term? Ryan appears intent on achieving, so to speak, the least bad outcome, one vote at a time, at the cost of being drawn into a game of entitlement spending so out of control that deals like the one struck yesterday do essentially nothing to change it. Rubio wishes to protest the whole game, standing athwart it, to paraphrase William F. Buckley, yelling "Stop!" The price Rubio pays is simple. Operationally--that is to say, in the countless day-to-day decisions on Capitol Hill that affect actual legislation--he risks irrelevance.

 

Both approaches have much to commend them--and much to condemn them. Choosing between them strikes me as very, very difficult.

 

(Snip)