Understanding the Ryan plan: “The striking thing about Paul Ryan’s ascent is the gulf between his proposals and the way the media have characterized them. Since Mitt Romney named Ryan to the ticket on Saturday, the news has been filled with talk of the “ fiscal conservative ” (NPR) “ intent on erasing deficits ” (New York Times) who has become “ the intellectual heart of the Republican Party’s movement to slash deficits” ( The Post). All of this is demonstrably false. Ryan’s con has succeeded largely because Democrats haven’t sensed the political salience of assailing his plans from the right ; instead, they’ve chosen to slam only Ryan’s regressive priorities and Medicare scheme,” writes CAP’s Matt Miller. (Washington Post)

Paul Ryan and the triumph of theory. (Washington Post)

Politico’s Arena asks: Can Paul Ryan boost Romney’s poll numbers. Brookings’ Darrel West answers.

The Romney-Ryan ticket has significance for three reasons, says AEI’s Peter Wallison. (AEI)

Paul Ryan will put issues front and center of the campaign, says AEI’s Michael Barone: “Ryan doesn’t fit some of the standard criteria for vice president. He hasn’t won a statewide election, held an executive position, or become well known nationally or even in much of Wisconsin. . . But more than anyone else, more even than the putative presidential nominee (as impolite as it is to say), Ryan has set the course for the Republican party for the past three years, both on policy and in politics.” (National Review)

Paul Ryan’s liberal fan club: “There is one point on which Democratic strategists and the hard right are united: they fervidly support Mitt Romney’s decision to choose Paul Ryan, Republican of Wisconsin, as his vice-presidential running mate,” writes Thomas Edsall. (New York Times)

Third Way’s Bill Schneider: Can Paul Ryan sell austerity? (Politico)

The 60 Minutes interview with Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan:

Guests on the Sunday political talk shows will, no doubt, be focused on the news that Rep. Paul Ryan has been announced as Mitt Romney’s running mate. Some of the guest lists for the shows seem a little light, raising the question as to whether or not shows left a slot open to get Romney’s VP pick at the last minute. And now that we know it’s Paul Ryan, will he appear on any of the shows this week?

Full line-up below. What catches your eye?

NORFOLK, VA - AUGUST 11: Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) and U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) wave as Ryan is announced as his vice presidential running mate aboard the USS Wisconsin August 11, 2012 in Norfolk, Virginia. (Win McNamee - GETTY IMAGES)

•NBC’s Meet the Press: Former Governor Tim Pawlenty; Rachel Maddow, MSNBC; Chuck Todd, NBC; former Gov. Frank Keating (R-OK); Dan Balz, Washington Post

•CBS’ Face the Nation: Eric Fehrnstrom, senior advisor to the Romney Campaign; Stephanie Cutter, Obama deputy campaign manager; Newt Gingrich; Ruth Marcus, Washington Post; Bob Shrum, The Week; David Frum, Daily Beast; Michael Gerson, Washington Post; Roger Simon, Politico

•ABC’s This Week: Former Gov. Tim Pawlenty; David Axelrod, senior adviser to the Obama campaign; Cokie Roberts, ABC; former Vermont Governor Howard Dean; Paul Gigot, Wall Street Journal; California Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom; Peggy Noonan, Wall Street Journal

•Fox News Sunday: Sen. John McCain (R-AZ); Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL); Chip Saltsman, former Huckabee campaign manager; Erin McPike, RealClearPolitics; Liz Cheney, Keep America Safe; David Drucker, Roll Call

•CNN’s State of the Union with Candy Crowley: Sen. John Thune (R-SD); David Axelrod, senior adviser to the Obama campaign; Ed Gillespie, senior adviser to the Romney campaign;

•CNN’s Reliable Sources with Howard Kurtz: Stephanie Miller, Current TV; Dan Schnur, Republican strategist; Robin Abcarian, Los Angeles Times; Matt Belloni, Hollywood Reporter; Christine Brennan, USA Today

Politico’s Arena asks: Does Obama’s Bain ad go too far? CEPR’s Dean Baker answers.

“President Obama has created a firestorm by overturning the work requirements of the popular 1996 welfare-reform law. Now his White House is bristling because Mitt Romney dares to point out that fact on the stump and in a new campaign ad,” writes Heritage’s Robert Rector. (National Review)

“What’s the best way of trashing Mitt Romney’s tax plan? In these days of class warfare, it’s to say his plan would result in tax cuts for high-income earners but tax increases for everyone else,” writes Manhattan Institute’s Diana Furchtgott-Roth. (Washington Examiner)

Bring back Build America Bonds: “The unemployment rate remains stuck at more than 8 percent. More investment in roads, water systems, airports and other public infrastructure would bring both short- and long-term benefits. And state and local governments face ongoing deficits. So wouldn’t it be great if we could design an efficient way to channel tax subsidies to state and local governments to invest in infrastructure?” writes CFR’s Peter Orszag. (Bloomberg)

AEI’s Jonah Goldberg: The GOP and the Latino vote. (National Review)

What the U.S. should do in Syria: “The United States has a window to facilitate an orderly transition in Syria without deploying military force. But the window is narrowing — and the Obama administration will need to adjust its political strategy to succeed,” writes Zalmay Khalilzad (Washington Post)

The frenzy over sequestration is for no good reason, argue Christopher Preble, Benjamin Friedman and Dan Mitchell of the Cato Institute. As they see it, sequestration doesn’t really address our federal budget problem, doesn’t get the defense budget under control and doesn’t pose a risk to our national security.

Under sequestration, “all we’re doing is shaving the rate of growth of government,” says Mitchell.

However, defense hawks continue to argue that should the military budget be cut at all, it’s at the cost of national security. That’s simply not the case, says Preble.

“We could be spending considerably less at no loss to U.S. security,” he says. “If anything, our spending so much undermines our security because it causes our allies to grow dependent on us spending on their behalf.”

If there is one group that may be justified in panicking over sequestration, it’s the defense contractors.

Politico’s Arena asks: Could Chris Christie be Mitt Romney’s VP? Woodrow Wilson Center’s Aaron David Miller answers. So does Brookings’ Darrell West.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie back among names discussed as a possible running mate for Mitt Romney. (Chip Somodevilla - GETTY IMAGES) But, as Christie points out, nobody votes for VP. (Politico)

Chris Christie on the role of the VP candidate: “No one’s saying, ‘I’m not sure about this Obama guy but, boy, I love Biden,’” Christie said, according to video of the news conference. “No matter who Governor Romney picks, if the people of the United States are not convinced that he is the right man to be president of the United States right now, no matter who he picks for vice president, they’re not voting for him and by the same token that went for President Obama four years ago.” (ABC)

AEI’s Jonah Goldberg wants to see more gaffes from Mitt Romney: “One of the few things Americans on both sides of the partisan divide can agree on is that this election is shaping up to be vexingly petty. The hunt for gaffes — some real, many imagined — has taken over. Romney’s recent overseas tour, we are told, produced three: An impolitic, if defensible, statement about Britain’s preparations for the Olympics; a statement about the importance of culture in economic development; and when an aide to Romney dressed down a reporter with an inflated sense of entitlement.” (USA Today)

Victor Davis Hanson is stuck on Obama and the ‘postmodern president.’ (National Review)

AEI’s Arthur Brooks wants to know if Obama means it when he says ”you’ve got to earn your success.” (Wall Street Journal)

Room for Debate asks: As stock markets are increasingly dominated by high-frequency trading, have they become so risky that the average American investor should be wary? How should regulations evolve to respond to modern trading? (New York Times)

“A year ahead of the mayoral race, pro-“labor” advocates are trying to strongarm City Council Speaker Christine Quinn into holding a vote on a bill requiring employers to offer sick leave. Quinn should keep resisting, as she did when the topic last came up two years ago: The bill could cost the city thousands of entry-level jobs,” writes Manhattan Institute’s Nicole Gelinas. (New York Post)

Catherine Bertini and Dan Glickman: Feeding the world in the face of drought. (Politico)

Cato’s Gene Healy: Take me down to the parasite city. (Washington Examiner)