The Principal Themes of the RNC Convention are Built on Lies and Misrepresentations

[Debaser]

@Voyager

The build it thing is only a gaffe if you edit out what he said before.

No. It’s a gaffe and remains a gaffe even when you play the entire clip in full context.

[John_Mace]

@Richard_Parker

John Mace: I did put time into backing them up. I found you not only the underlying CBO report, but a nice summary of it. And you complain to me about the length of the CBO report and offer a half-hearted ctrl-f search. :rolleyes:

Since you seem to be suggesting I’m blowing smoke, here’s the exact quote from the first page of the second cite:

If you want to reject the CBO’s analysis because you’re “not going based on projected grow rates,” then more power to you. I don’t know what kind of magic you’d prefer to rely on for estimating the impact of that budget plan. And I don’t care, because I wasn’t trying to persuade you of the accuracy of this point. The whole tangent was whether there was an objective basis for Obama’s claim. Obviously there is.

ETA: And, by the way, the percentage of GDP going to spending in 2050 is based on Ryan’s own parameter. It isn’t a projection.

No need to get all pissy. I was running short on time earlier, and it’s abso-fucking-lutely SOP around here to back up claims with cites and quotes. And asking for a cite doesn’t mean you think someone is blowing smoke, and I didn’t mean that in this case. It’s best to not speculate about other poster’s motives, and I’m very surprised to see you do that.

And well, yeah, I’m not really interested in anyone’s projections about what spending will be in 2050, whether they are Ryan’s or Obama’s or the CBO. It’s a meaningless number because it will never come to pass that way. From your 3rd cite:

For a number of reasons, this analysis focuses heavily on the ten-year budget window. Although it is critical to understand the long-term effects of major policies included in any debt reduction plan, significant uncertainty in projections and lack of specificity in policies make concrete scoring beyond the first decade impossible for many of these packages.

Not difficult, impossible.

[RitterSport]

@Debaser

Once again I’d point you to Romney’s statement on the issue…

Yes, we agree with you that Romney is lying about Obama’s statement. Thanks for showing us the exact words of his lies!

[Richard_Parker]

John: I offered you three specific cites and you chided me for not being “willing to put the time into backing [my assertions].” And then accuse me of getting pissy. Nice.

Here’s the bottom line: Obama had a rock solid objective basis for saying that Romney proposed to gut infrastructure spending. That basis is that Romney endorsed Ryan’s budget, which would cut all federal spending down to a level below current defense spending.

Your calling this a projection that you don’t trust completely misses the point.

[RitterSport]

Bricker, any comment about Romney statement, helpfully posted by Debaser?

Here it is again:

[QUOTE=Romney]
The president does, in fact, believe that people who build enterprises like this really aren’t responsible for it, that in fact it’s a collective success of the whole society that somehow builds enterprises like this.
[/QUOTE]

To me, this sounds like Romney is stating that Obama assigns close to zero responsibility to the business owner. What’s your read?

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

Ryan’s bit on the plant closing was a lie of multilayered deceit. A rich creamy tiered wedding cake of a lie.

Here’s a nice summary with a picture and everything:
http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/08/30/13572758-the-janesville-falsehood?lite

Not only does he want to blame Obama for a plant that closed under Bush, he wants to forget that his man argued for a plan to let Detroit “go bankrupt.”. As we all know, if not for Obama, many more GM plants would now be closed.

I think one has to have an unleashed mind to buy the defense of Ryan on this lie.

[Gangster_Octopus]

Let’s not forget is a speech ion August 17 Ryan explicitly said (lied), "“I remember President Obama visiting it when he was first running, saying he’ll keep that plant open,” and then calling it a broken promise, when Obama did no such thing. And of course Ryan fails to mention that his small government mentality doesn’t extend to lobbying for taxpayer incentives to keep the plant open. Nor does he mention how when GM was looking to re-open several plants that closed under Bush that Governor Scott Walker nary raised a finger while the Governor of Tennessee managed to get GM to re-open a plant there.

Nope, none of that, just a lie about what Obama said to provide a simpleminded tale straight out of Grimm.

[Finagle]

@Sam_Stone

Fortunately, that’s not what he said:

Nowhere did he say it was Obama’s fault. What he basically said was that Obama campaigned on a false promise. Note that Ryan also said right in the speech that this was 2008, when Bush was President, and that Obama made the claim before he was president.

This is wrong on a couple of counts, Sam. First of all, Ryan has been using the same story in his stump speeches ever since he got nominated. Plenty of time for people to point out that the plant was closed/put on standby in 2008.. So to keep on making the same rhetorical point in a speech with this visibility is either massively dishonest or simply stupid – your call.
Note, too, that in the quote in the cited article, Ryan wasn’t so delicate in his phrasing, deliberately blaming Obama for the close of a plant (that made SUVs!) due to the rising cost of gas. Really, it takes a lot chutzpah to say that Obama should have lowered the price of gas so people would buy more SUVs (thereby raising the price of gas).

Also, it’s fairly damn stupid to remind people of a quote like “I believe that if our government is there to support you … this plant will be here for another hundred years.” when * you’re the representative of the government in charge of that particular district.* Kind of reminds people that as a Congressman, Ryan’s been a useless puddle of disappointment, doesn’t it?

[ElvisL1ves]

I have to agree this is the biggest of Ryan’s lies in his speech, and it’s pathetic that we have so many to choose from.

Last night, Ryan said that the Obama presidency “began with a perfect Triple-A credit rating for the United States; it ends with a downgraded America.”

And here are the facts, from the actual statement from S&P at the time:

Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act. Key macroeconomic assumptions in the base case scenario include trend real GDP growth of 3% and consumer price inflation near 2% annually over the decade.

Ryan and his crew of nihilists in the House, with their absolute refusal to raise revenue, their absolute refusal to negotiate in good faith, caused the downgrade. S&P assumed that there was no way that the Bush tax cuts would be allowed to expire because of Ryan and his cohorts, and slammed them and the nation’s credit rating for it, probably in hopes that it would wake them up to the danger they were posing to the economy. Those warnings certainly fell on deaf ears. The fact that Ryan was openly flirting with the idea of actually letting the country default for “a day or two or three or four" demonstrates just how futile that effort was.

[magellan01]

@Hentor_the_Barbarian

Ryan’s bit on the plant closing was a lie of multilayered deceit. A rich creamy tiered wedding cake of a lie.

Here’s a nice summary with a picture and everything:
http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/08/30/13572758-the-janesville-falsehood?lite

Not only does he want to blame Obama for a plant that closed under Bush, he wants to forget that his man argued for a plan to let Detroit “go bankrupt.”. As we all know, if not for Obama, many more GM plants would now be closed.

I think one has to have an unleashed mind to buy the defense of Ryan on this lie.

Don’t be so quick to plant your face into that wedding cake. It’s explained well here and here. According to the latter link, the Janesville Gazette reported in February of 2009 that:

General Motors will end medium-duty truck production in Janesville on April 23 [2009], four months to the day after the plant stopped building full-size sport utility vehicles.

About 100 employees associated with the line learned of the layoffs Wednesday.

Here’s a quote from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel from last September: (emphasis mine)

The commitment to the former Saturn plant in Tennessee was part of a contract settlement reached late last week between GM and the United Auto Workers union.

Since they were shut down in 2009, both the Janesville and Tennessee plants have been on standby status, meaning they were not producing vehicles, but they were not completely shut down.

And from an article published on February 19, 2009, in Janesville’s GazetteXtra.com, we see:

JANESVILLE — General Motors will end medium-duty truck production in Janesville on April 23, four months to the day after the plant stopped building full-size sport utility vehicles.

About 100 employees associated with the line learned of the layoffs Wednesday.

April will mark the end of vehicle production at the Janesville plant that traces its roots to 1919 and the Samson Model M tractor. Chevrolet production started in Janesville in 1923.

<snip>

What remains in Janesville—at least until April 23—is the NPR “W” series. The truck is Isuzu designed and engineered except for its GM power train.

Wednesday’s announcement has been expected for months.

GM said last June it would end local production of light-duty trucks—Suburbans, Tahoes and GMC Yukons—by the end of 2010 at the latest. It also said it would shut down the medium-duty Isuzu line sometime in 2009.

SUV production ended in Janesville on Dec. 23, a little more than five months after the plant lost a second shift of production.

Enjoy!

[magellan01]

@Finagle

This is wrong on a couple of counts, Sam. First of all, Ryan has been using the same story in his stump speeches ever since he got nominated. Plenty of time for people to point out that the plant was closed/put on standby in 2008.. So to keep on making the same rhetorical point in a speech with this visibility is either massively dishonest or simply stupid – your call.
Note, too, that in the quote in the cited article, Ryan wasn’t so delicate in his phrasing, deliberately blaming Obama for the close of a plant (that made SUVs!) due to the rising cost of gas. Really, it takes a lot chutzpah to say that Obama should have lowered the price of gas so people would buy more SUVs (thereby raising the price of gas).

Also, it’s fairly damn stupid to remind people of a quote like “I believe that if our government is there to support you … this plant will be here for another hundred years.” when * you’re the representative of the government in charge of that particular district.* Kind of reminds people that as a Congressman, Ryan’s been a useless puddle of disappointment, doesn’t it?

I think you’re missing the point. It’s not whether the plant should have closed because it was making SUVs or some other reason, it’s that Obama opened his yap and once again wrote a check with his mouth that couldn’t be cashed.

[Richard_Parker]

magellan01, since you’re here, what do you think of the veracity of the Romney campaign’s welfare attack?

Debaser? Bricker?

[elucidator]

Liberal hypocrisy, collectivist statism, and class war. Next!

[Gangster_Octopus]

@magellan01

Don’t be so quick to plant your face into that wedding cake. It’s explained well here and here. According to the latter link, the Janesville Gazette reported in February of 2009 that:

Here’s a quote from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel from last September: (emphasis mine)

And from an article published on February 19, 2009, in Janesville’s GazetteXtra.com, we see:

Enjoy!

Yes, they continued making 25 Isuzus a week into 2009, so what. The GM plant was effectively shut down except to finish off these Isuzus, which are not GM cars. So technically the plant was not closed down completely, it was just running out the string after it had ceased all SUV production in December and after it was announced it was closing down.

[elucidator]

But not dead! Sure, brain dead, organs harvested, but not off the ventilator! Obama could have rushed in there, borrowed a couple hundred million dollars (the Reps in Congress would just love it to death!..), put it all back, rehire everybody and start making cars no one would buy.

Profit!

[Airbeck]

@elucidator

But not dead! Sure, brain dead, organs harvested, but not off the ventilator! Obama could have rushed in there, borrowed a couple hundred million dollars (the Reps in Congress would just love it to death!..), put it all back, rehire everybody and start making cars no one would buy.

Profit!

So Obama, in a sense, pulled out the feeding tube from the plant?

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Gangster_Octopus

Yes, they continued making 25 Isuzus a week into 2009, so what. The GM plant was effectively shut down except to finish off these Isuzus, which are not GM cars. So technically the plant was not closed down completely, it was just running out the string after it had ceased all SUV production in December and after it was announced it was closing down.

http://gazettextra.com/news/2008/dec/23/goodbyeand-thanks/

Here’s the local paper from December 2008 discussing the last day. The plant was closing. The decision was made. Blaming Obama for it is bullshit. A lie. A gargantuan fucking lie.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Airbeck

So Obama, in a sense, pulled out the feeding tube from the plant?

The alternative would be government insinuating itself into the business decisions of GM. We oppose that, right?

[RedSwinglineOne]

@magellan01

I think you’re missing the point. It’s not whether the plant should have closed because it was making SUVs or some other reason, it’s that Obama opened his yap and once again wrote a check with his mouth that couldn’t be cashed.

I think you are missing a bigger point. Last night Paul Ryan made the biggest speech of his career, and in his attempt to discredit the President, the best line he could come up with was a story about an automotive plant closing slightly before (or after if it makes you feel better) Obama took office.

Really?! Thats your best shot Mr Ryan? The worst thing Obama has done in 4 years was let a plant close during Bush’s watch?

[Sam_Stone]

@elucidator

But not dead! Sure, brain dead, organs harvested, but not off the ventilator! Obama could have rushed in there, borrowed a couple hundred million dollars (the Reps in Congress would just love it to death!..), put it all back, rehire everybody and start making cars no one would buy.

Profit!

Were you paying any attention at all to what I wrote? The ‘organs’ weren’t harvested. They were intentionally kept in place and maintained specifically so the plant could be re-opened. This happens all the time. Plants close when demand is low, and they re-open when demand comes back, or they’re re-tooled if the mix of vehicles changes, or sometimes they’re permanently closed if the company feels that there’s no way to make it competitive again.

During the auto bailout, that plant was still on ‘standby’. GM needed a factory to build its new small car. The choice was between Janesville and another plant on standby in Orion, Michigan. Janesville lost.

So yes, there was a very real possibility that the plant would re-open. Furthermore, when Obama made his speech in October he already knew the plant was scheduled to close, which is why he specifically mentioned having it retooled so it could be re-opened.

@Candidate Obama

As president, I will lead an effort to retool plants like the GM facility in Janesville so we can build the fuel-efficient cars of tomorrow and create good-paying jobs in Wisconsin and all across America.

Do you get that? He knows it’s scheduled to close, so now he’s promising that if he’s elected, he’ll ‘lead an effort’ to re-tool the plant and bring good-paying jobs to Wisconsin.

In fact, he got exactly that chance. The Obama administration was heavily involved in the restructuring of GM. Part of the restructuring was to determine where the new small car should be built. There were two choices: Janesville, or Orion Michigan. Orion was selected, and Janesville was shut down. Obama did not ‘lead an effort’ to save Janesville. He broke his promise.

Of course, if Bain Capital had decided to shut it down, you guys would be screaming that Romney destroyed Janesville and is responsible for anyone who dies there in the next 10 years, and you’d use it as an example of rapacious capitalism run amok.