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

[Gyrate]

I hate being Mr Pedantic but Obama said “I will lead an effort to retool **plants like **the GM facility in Janesville”, not “I will lead an effort to retool the GM facility in Janesville”. And indeed he did lead an effort to retool plants like the one in Janesville. Just not that particular one.

I will agree to it being considered misleading (presumably deliberately so) campaign speechifying, but not actual lying or a broken promise.

[Gangster_Octopus]

@Sam_Stone

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.

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.

Except you know what, GM did manage to re-open some plants thanks to help during the Obama administration, they just didn’t re-open that one.

[Sam_Stone]

I acknowledged Obama’s ‘like Janesville’ phrasing. But he also said, “and bring good paying jobs to Wisconsin.” He was clearly trying to give the impression that he was going to try to save the plant without actually committing to it. Politicians do this all the time.

The point is, Ryan was not lying. The simplistic ‘fact check’ that the plant closed before Obama was elected and therefore Ryan was lying about what happened is simply not true.

[elucidator]

So, that’s one down and…fifty?..to go.

[Bricker]

@lance_strongarm

Then why don’t you give him the same credit with the “you didn’t build that” thing? Obviously he doesn’t mean that the federal government goes out and starts businesses for people who think they are doing it for themselves. He simply meant to say something like “you didn’t do it all alone; the government did things that made your business possible.” Why play these games?

Have you read my posts in this thread?

[Bricker]

@RitterSport

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

Here it is again:

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

No, to me it reads like Obama is assigning a significant share of credit to entities other than the business owner…not zero responsibility to the business owner, but since the bulk of credit needs to go with the business owner, Obama’s approach isn’t one I agree with.

[magellan01]

@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.

I guess the question is then, why did Obama make the promise he did?

[magellan01]

@RedSwinglineOne

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?

You just contradicted yourself.

Ad I think you’re probably the only one to think it was Ryan’s best line.

[magellan01]

@Hentor_the_Barbarian

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.

It stopped making SUVs at that time. Really. I gave you multiple sites explaining this. Read them again. Yet YOU continue to perpetuate the lie that the plant closed in 2008. In fact, you’r own site explains that it was the end of the production of SUVs. Unbelievable. :rolleyes:

Also, no one is blaming Obama for the plant shutting down. Ryan was accusing Obama of promising something—that the plant would be retooled so it would not close—and then not following through on it.

My goodness, just how much shit can you get wrong in one short post? Yeesh!

[magellan01]

@Gangster_Octopus

Except you know what, GM did manage to re-open some plants thanks to help during the Obama administration, they just didn’t re-open that one.

Then perhaps Obama shouldn’t have told the workers there that he would see to it that that plant would be retooled. Correct?

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@magellan01

It stopped making SUVs at that time. Really. I gave you multiple sites explaining this. Read them again. Yet YOU continue to perpetuate the lie that the plant closed in 2008. In fact, you’r own site explains that it was the end of the production of SUVs. Unbelievable. :rolleyes:

Also, no one is blaming Obama for the plant shutting down. Ryan was accusing Obama of promising something—that the plant would be retooled so it would not close—and then not following through on it.

My goodness, just how much shit can you get wrong in one short post? Yeesh!

“About 50 workers will remain in the plant until spring to produce medium-duty trucks under a contract with Isuzu.”

Is it your contention that a complete halt to all production was not expected in Dec. 2008? If so, that’s a completely intentional misrepresentation on your part. Either this whole effort is a really odd hill to die on, or more likely a concerted effort to distract from the full scope of Ryan’s lyin.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@magellan01

Then perhaps Obama shouldn’t have told the workers there that he would see to it that that plant would be retooled. Correct?

This is also a falsehood.

[Lobohan]

@magellan01

Then perhaps Obama shouldn’t have told the workers there that he would see to it that that plant would be retooled. Correct?

This is a little far in the thread to still be confused about what Obama said.

[John_Mace]

@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.

Richard, I respect you too much to prolong this pissing context. Let’s let it go.

The reason I like to see the actual quotes is I like to make sure we’re talking about the same thing. It’s hard to know that when the first cite I open looks like it’s about 50 pages long. I was not suggesting that you were blowing smoke.

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.

The Ryan budget doesn’t go out to 2050, and no one puts any stock in those numbers anyway. They’re meaningless. The budget was designed to be a 10 year document, and if you want to take issue with his voucher plan for Medicare, for instance, that’s fine. But let’s not talk about projections out to 2050.

[Frylock]

@Bricker

No, to me it reads like Obama is assigning a significant share of credit to entities other than the business owner…not zero responsibility to the business owner, but since the bulk of credit needs to go with the business owner, Obama’s approach isn’t one I agree with.

Why does anyone care, when it comes to policy discussions, about “credit?” Shouldn’t it be about causation?

[Richard_Parker]

@John_Mace

The Ryan budget doesn’t go out to 2050.

Cite? The CBO sure thinks it does.

[Bricker]

@Frylock

Why does anyone care, when it comes to policy discussions, about “credit?” Shouldn’t it be about causation?

The underlying question is, I think, what kinds of policies should the government put in place?

Between this comment and the series of ads casting aspersions on Romney for his wealth, I don’t believe that Obama is all that convinced that individual achievement should drive any sort of government policy.

[elucidator]

Romney certainly showed foresight and shrewd judgement in his choice of parents.

[Untoward_Parable]

@Bricker

The underlying question is, I think, what kinds of policies should the government put in place?

Between this comment and the series of ads casting aspersions on Romney for his wealth, I don’t believe that Obama is all that convinced that individual achievement should drive any sort of government policy.

The republican leadership does not believe in individual achievement. They would like nothing more than to maximize the impact of the advantages of birth. They do not want inheritance taxes. They do not want universal good access to education. They do not want children to have free healthcare. They do not want good public transportation. They do not want to be interfered with by government if they are discriminating against racial or religious minorities or women. They want to punish poor women who get pregnant young by their own youthful mistakes or by someone else’s crime. They do not want monopolies interfered with. They don’t want corporate crime interfered with. On and on it has nothing to do with individual achievement in any manner other than some regard to the best of each highly privileged generation.

[Frylock]

@Untoward_Parable

The republican leadership does not believe in individual achievement. They would like nothing more than to maximize the impact of the advantages of birth. They do not want inheritance taxes. They do not want universal good access to education. They do not want children to have free healthcare. They do not want good public transportation. They do not want to be interfered with by government if they are discriminating against racial or religious minorities or women. They want to punish poor women who get pregnant young by their own youthful mistakes or by someone else’s crime. They do not want monopolies interfered with. They don’t want corporate crime interfered with. On and on it has nothing to do with individual achievement in any manner other than some regard to the best of each highly privileged generation.

Exactly. It’s very strange that republicans think they have an intellectual monopoly on valuing individual achievement when almost every republican policy is clearly designed to minimize opportunities for individual achievement.

Infrastructure and safety nets are designed to maximize opportunity. Why don’t people understand this?