Your statement makes you a 100% liar times two.

Politifact rating on two Ryan claims: Janesville closing (FALSE) and Medicare (MOSTLY FALSE): http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/aug/29/night-two-tampa-running-mate-and-more/

Ryan was laying FALSE and MOSTLY FALSE claims on the American public. Ayn Rand teaches:

"Man—every man—is an end in himself, not a means to the ends of others; he must live for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself; he must work for his rational self-interest, with the achievement of his own happiness as the highest moral purpose of his life." (Introducing Objectivism)

Is lying working for rational self-interest?

Here's another Ayn Rand mouthing, about Native Americans (from a Q&A at West Point, 1974). Gives a "flavor" of what's in the head of Paul Ryan's hero:

They didn't have any rights to the land, and there was no reason for anyone to grant them rights which they had not conceived and were not using. What was it that they were fighting for, when they opposed white men on this continent? For their wish to continue a primitive existence, their 'right' to keep part of the earth untouched, unused and not even as property, but just keep everybody out so that you will live practically like an animal, or a few caves above it. Any white person who brings the element of civilization has the right to take over this continent."

Paul Ryan's been filling his head with Rand for decades. Sure he's vice/presidential material?

CNN rates Ryan's comments on the Janesville plant to be true, and covers the false assumptions of Politifact without naming them.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/30/politics/pol-fact-check-ryan-gm/index.html?iref=allsearch

National Review points out how absurd the Politifact medicare conclusions were.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/315125/politifiction-editors

Up until its rating of Paul Ryan's lies, Politifact was accepted here as a metric of accuracy.

CNN has been accused of having conservative and liberal bias in the past; National Review is a purely conservative publication.

Instead of attacking Politifact, how about sending an email to Paul Ryan requesting that he stick to the facts?

Here's another Ayn Rand quote for you since Paul Ryan isn't here to share:

"Try to tell a Chinese mother, whose child is dying of cholera: 'Should one do everything one can? Of course not.'" (From The New Left: The Anti-Industrial Revolution.)

Nice! ; (

No wonder the Catholic bishops wrote multiple letters to Congress about the Ryan budget, stating in part that “The House-passed budget resolution fails to meet these moral criteria.”

http://www.usccb.org/news/2012/12-063.cfm

Here's a great video that shares the depth of Paul Ryan's lifelong infatuation with Ayn Rand, until about a month ago: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/30/colbert-mocks-paul-ryan-ayn-rand_n_1842877.html

Sorry Bren, but the errors in the Politifact article are corrected in the CNN article. You can attack the messenger, but not the message. That's apparent by your drive-by attempt at reputation assassination, without refuting a single word it said.

In fact the Politifact article try to hang its article on something that Ryan didn't say. How long DID Obama say the Janesville plant would be open? 97 MORE YEARS!

Has anyone noticed the Volt was just taken out of production???

If a conservative said "there is red on the flag", PolidiotFact would rate it false. They would conclude that there are other colors on the flag and that it is not red, it is magenta.

Congratulations on the independent thinking Steve - you make Wisconsin proud!

Actually, Obama’s speech in Janesville happened in February 2008. In June of that same year, G.M. announced the plant would close. Most of it was shuttered in December; it continued producing medium-duty trucks until June 2009, when that, too, stopped, in accordance with the plan announced in 2008. While it’s ludicrous to criticize a politician for a plant closing that predated his time in office, Ryan himself stands accused of not helping to save the factory.

@Dirk -

When did Ryan ever speak to a mass assembly of the plant workers and claim that if they supported him, that he "believe[d] that if our government is there to support you, and give you the assistance you need to re-tool and make this transition, that this plant will be here for another hundred years?" Or pledge to the keep the plant "viable" as a part of his proposed auto bailout package?

Obama had the effect of altering a lot of GM's central planning decisions via his car czar in his shady back room, closed door, smokey room bailout deal. If Obama was just going to let GM run things the way they wanted to, then why the need for a car czar and UAW deals? Other plants slated for closure remained - how?

Obviously, if he cared a lot about that plant, I'm sure that he could have done something to keep it open. After all, he was then in charge of the government that was providing assistance to the auto industry, was he not? So what did Obama get wrong in that speech that resulted in his belief being so wrong? What was different about the plant in December of 2008 vs June of 2009 other than a lot less people working there & a decision on a piece of paper in GM's corporate offices ordering the closure of the plant? Wasn't Hope supposed to Change all that? Isn't that what Obama was promising?

You guys can dance around the semantics and spin all you want, but Ryan pegged Obama dead on in this issue and kudos to him for doing so!

Just another empty promise by Obama. Ryan nailed him on it and the libs try their song and dance trying to change the subject.

Hoffa - Give everyone a break with your thin, desperate defense of Ryan's lie that Obama could have saved GM Janesville, but did not. First you rant about government being in everyone's business, then you wanted Obama to step in and order the Janesville plant stay open, in spite of rapidly changing conditions. better information later and rational delegation to people that knew the business better.than he.
Conditions changed radically in 2008, deteriorating rapidly from Obama's speech to where the world economy teetered on collapse. Do you really want a President keeping a year old vision intact that Janesville could survive in spite of such new economics? You are too rigid, too unchanging in a fluid, spiraling situation like 2008.
Also, you would be first in line to criticize keeping uneconomic plants open, no matter what the promise in the past. Bottom line, you have to compromise and make concessions to make an overall success. If you just stand rigid, you will be a brittle target.

@Dirk -

Funny how that whole new world economic condition didn't stop Obama from investing our tax dollars in Solyndra, despite the people in his own DOE that knew better advising that the company wasn't ready for prime time.

How exactly do such double standards work, and why do you continue to justify them?

Now you're spinning more than the tea-cup ride at Disney amusement parks!

Sorry Mr. Hoffa, Mr. Gutzmiller has this one. Your being way too petty. And, I'm confused. I thought republicans want a smaller government and it's hands out of their business. But yet Obama was ridiculed for not getting up in GM's business far enough? That is unfair to Obama and it's misleading to voters. Why do they think they need to use lies to win??

@Pamela -

So, the facts become petty when they're inconvenient to the position you support - interesting!

Obama is the one who made the speech to the Janesville autoworkers. And Ryan supported a Carter style bailout of the auto industry, just as many other conservatives also did.

Carter saved Chrysler under Iaccoca back in '79 with a straight up interest bearing loan with a defined repayment schedule, remember? The loans were repaid in full with interest ahead of schedule. That's how G W Bush set up the bailouts that Ryan voted in favor of. Just like in the Carter bailout, the taxpayers would have gotten all their money back and even made money off the interest payments.

Under Obama's perverted restructuring of the bailouts, the taxpayers lose out on billions while the UAW, Italians (Fiat), Canadians, and large private corp interests were allowed to profit at the taxpayer's loss.

Why was that necessary? As a liberal, why doesn't that upset you? Why couldn't Obama have just followed the successful Carter bailout model?

Didn't Obama promise transparency? Those bailouts were not transparent at all. Didn't Obama promise to close the WH to lobbyists and special interests? And yet, the UAW was there nearly every day during the auto bailout process.

Obama LIED and cost us billions to appease his friends and you're OK with that.

In Hoffa's opinion, that's pretty SICK!!!

@ the Hoffa, How do you know so much about what went on behind close doors? And, don't you think the union should have been in those meetings, they represented the workers affected. Since neither you nor I were included in those meetings, it's all presumption on our part, eh? I do know the circumstances concerning Chrysler in '79 were different and so were the players. So I come to the conclusion that Obama couldn't have struck the same deals. Also the time and magnitude was conciderable different. Obama surely didn't have the luxury of time to gamble the weight of thousands and thousands to be unemployed and with what interest could be milked from a faltering industry. I also know that somehow, someone somewhere always profits from someone elses misfortunes. I wouldn't call them "his friends" or ours. Heck, their own families think they are discusting, but love the money they provide them. It's a sick world we live in.

@Pamela -

Didn't Obama promise transparency? Didn't he promise that we could watch the negotiations on C-SPAN 3? He sure did. And the reason I know is because my father was a high ranking UAW steward at the time.

How was the Chrysler situation in '79 different than the GM and Chrysler situation in 2008/9? In both cases, what lead to the need for bailouts is that the companies were running out of cash on hand and couldn't pay their debts. What was different? In both cases, the government gave them lots of money. In Carter's case, the government got all it's money back and even made a little interest. In Obama's case, the government will lose out on over $25B while the UAW, Fiat, and private investors are all profiting off our tax-dollars thanks to Obama. Honestly what was so different that required Obama to do it his way as opposed to following Carter's successful formula? All the companies needed and were given was cash. So why did we need the extra Obama crony deals - you haven't provided an answer to this question. Please give an analysis.

You're clearly ignoring reality and spinning to suit your own partisan agenda - why don't you just admit to it.

Your bs is not true, as Carter didn't allow the taxpayers to get screwed over, just like Bush wasn't going to let the taxpayers get screwed over so others could profit. But Obama did, you can't defend it, and you're even OK with that because it was Obama. I'm sorry, but that's SICK!!!

Ryan also admitted during his speech that the Bush years and agenda weren't the right answer either - that's why he came up with a different path to follow.

Did you even listen to or read the transcript of his speech?

Meanwhile, Obama continues to double down.

Clearly, Ryan has a lot more humility than our current, and soon to be former President! Admitting that you're wrong when you clearly were is an admirable trait that everyone should embrace and respect, don't you think?

Steve used his $600 check from HR 5140 (2008) to purchase a website and table saw that started his business. While others used it for smokes and beer Steve invested and made millions paying it back in tax revenue thousands of times over. Thanks Paul Ryan!

Bren tried to turn it back as this was a line-item surplus with no luck. Paying for the processing and mailing of the "refund checks" required a loan from the Chinese. So a "refund" based on a line-item surplus and a harbinger of things to come with a new debt to a foreign, communist country. Thanks Paul Ryan!

Steve ®
There seems to be a lot of highly successful entrepreneurs that hang around Patch all day making claims about how hard working and busy they are. Some time ago, you seemed Steve to be a landscaper working for the 1%. Now you make wooden products?

I have never been a landscaper by trade, your internet memory needs practice. I also do not work with wood.

Steve ® - Why all the intrigue about how you supposedly make enough money to pose as a big shot entrepreneur on Patch all day. Your cred is dead.

Wisconsin Patch is covering the Ryan speech with such depth because Ryan represents the people of some of the local Patches and he is from Wisconsin.

If you want focus on Obama, try the Illinois or DC Patches.

@Doug - yup. We will have coverage from the DNC and we will check out what Obama says in his speech during that convention. Same thing with Romney and Biden. And James is right ... there is a lot more coverage about Ryan because Ryan's local.

Please don't over-exert yourselves covering Ryan. Those of us who have read Ayn Rand have a pretty fair idea of what this ambitious Objectivist is all about.

Bren, I am not sure if I am laughing so hard from my sweet purple cush or your psychophant drivel over Ayn Rand, Atheism or some continual mind numbing rant about ALEC. Give it a rest. It is mucus flowing from your keyboard.

Ima, you are wonderful! With your rich history of well-sourced inquiry and analysis you are one of the shining stars of this site. Shine on, little star!

; )

Romney was Steve's pick in 2008. It is unfortunate but good in a way we can show once and for all why liberalism is a failed religion.

NObama2012, really? It's really sad that it's 2012 and we still can't stop being racist. Who cares what a person's skin color is? A person's physical attributes do not make the person. Let's keep racist comments off of Patch.

Married into money is what Ryan did. That bothers me a lot less than his decades-long infatuation with atheist pseudo-intellectual Ayn Rand.

So he did go back after going black? He defies yet another mystery than lesser men fall prey to.

@NObama 2012 exposes one of the hidden beams under the Republican planks in their platform.

What about all of the related supply industries and jobs, skinny! I read that the auto bailout is attributed to saving nearly one million jobs. People should always come first.

Skinnydude be spot on.

Why are the Republicans buying GM products, including the Romneys? Chevy runs deep with Republicans! Like they would believe a hysterical screamer like
skinnyDUDE.

skinny provides no links to back up claims, I wish folks who make these types of accusations would back them up with facts. Accusing a leader of corruption could get a person in big trouble in some countries. Those who want to crush the Democratic Party and embrace a one-party system might not be aware of where that could actually lead.

@Bren -

The problem isn't the bailout - it's how Obama structured the bailout.

Under Bush, it was to be a straight up interest bearing loan with a defined repayment scheduled, just like Carter had successfully done for Chrysler under Iaccoca back in '79. The taxpayers actually would have recovered their full investment and actually made some interest on the deal, just as they did under Carter's auto bailout.

Obama restructured the bailout in a back room, behind closed doors, in a a smoke filled room to include a deal with the UAW, Italians, and Canadians, with the process being supervised by a self-appointed cars czar! What happened to all the hope and change he promised? What about all the campaign talk about transparency and closing the White House doors to lobbyists and cronyism? And under Obama's deal, the taxpayers stand to lose out on billions of dollars that were poured into the companies - if that wasn't a payout to the UAW, I don't know what else it honestly could have been.

Why aren't you enraged that Obama didn't make the car companies pay back their loans to the people before private individuals/entities were allowed to profit off their new found successes?

Come on - are you honestly that blind and in denial about the reality of the situation?

Personally, Hoffa would have preferred that Carter had handled this bailout instead of Obama!

Obama needs to GO ASAP!

ROMNEY/RYAN 2012!!!

@Dirk -

Why do so many self declared anti-conservatives and lovers of America and its people purchase foreign non-union labor made vehicles, such as Bren and yourself?

Don't you find that to be a bit contradictory?

Hoffa - A lot of your postures are actually support for your private desires.
You are just one of those old attorney guys that likes to drive big ass Cadillacs, so you wrap yourself in the flag and act like you are so sacrificing to drive one. You are driving that gas guzzler in spite of the UAW. Essentially, auto workers can organize anywhere in the U.S if they vote to do so. Most non-union auto companies are smart enough today to make conditions as good or better than a union factory, thanks to external union pressure.

@Dirk -

Weren't the problems leading to and necessitating the need for the auto bailouts in the first place the high legacy costs of union retirees vs their non-union competition and the disparity between the current compensation packages given to union workers vs the non-unionized competition? Those were the reasons given to the Obama administration, and he in turn perpetuated to the people of the nation, remember?

Apparently, by claiming that the conditions in non-union shops are on par with the unions ones, you're asserting that Obama accepted false reasons for engaging in the auto bailouts, much in the same way that Bush accepted the false WMD story in his reason for engaging in war with Iraq.

You've consistently blasted Bush over Iraq, so if you believe what you've asserted above, then why aren't you similarly blasting Obama for the auto bailouts?

You're nothing but a hypocrite that contradicts himself - grow a pair and just admit it already!

Hoffa - How you get from Janesville to the GM bailout and to Iraq and WMD shows you are forging new neural connections in your brain that is beyond us. Or your neural connections are short circuiting. All in all, nearly everyone is happy GM is a viable company today, and I doubt the deals were made in smoke filled back rooms as you portray. That is an image from the Hoffa and Mafia days.
And Bush and his administration were not deceived by anyone as to WMD, they went looking for any kind of reason for invading Iraq, even if they had to make up the evidence. Two oil men, Bush and Cheney, had oil fever.

@Dirk -

You're spinning more than a carnival tilt-a-whirl does!!!

@JRH....Keep it on subject. You know as well as I do that it wasn't just saving the auto companies but all the suppliers. I have no love for the big three after doing business with them for over a decade; but the domestic auto industry is built like a house of cards. You're just arguing for arguments sake. For someone who claims to be so independent, are you going to write in Ron Paul's name or are you going to vote for the mainstream ticket. I have more respect for you if you wrote in the real candidate you support than to support a deeply flawed ticket on either side. I'm still deciding who I'm going to write in.

@Lyle -

You know that Hoffa typically votes third party or independent candidates. However, with how close this election is turning out to be, and with no break through viable third party or independent candidate available (Paul has not announced that he's open to a write-in campaign), Hoffa has little choice but to cast his ballot for the lesser of the two evils.

Also, I don't see the Romney/Ryan ticket as being that fundamentally flawed. While I don't agree with everything, there is a good portion that I do like and I'm sure that we could come to an agreeable compromise on the things that I don't like. I also don't fully agree with Paul. In fact, there's on candidate that Hoffa fully sees eye to eye with.

So some amount of compromise becomes necessary in order for the republic to work, as we can't all be President, right?

Didn't you just do a blog on being able to compromise with your opponent on the points that you don't see eye to eye on? So why are you know saying that is has to be all or nothing?

@Bren
If you need links for the obvious truth my comment ..... you are clueless . Feel free not to comment to me as you really don't add anything but MSNBC talking points.The American people get it .......the left wing nut never will . Enjoy the kool aid ....Stay thirsty my friend lol

@Brittany -

So I guess the hundred or so workers that remained at the plant through to June of 2009, including my father, producing light to medium duty pickup trucks for the Isuzu contract don't count as actually producing salable vehicles, right?

Can you explain to us exactly how that works, as the liberal logic behind this really has me quite baffled?

You need to question who they is and why you are listening to them. A simple use of your google machine will show you the real fact. Not to mention this was very local for us do you not have any memory of local business events? Or was it just all bad under Doyle that they all melded together.

The point is, Obama came there and promised to save and retool the factory. It closed. Another silly broken pointless promise by this President. That is what Ryan was driving at. Not that it could be saved, that he just talks to talk to reel you in.

Actually, it was a little over 100 employees. I know - my father was a union steward for the UAW team that remained there. He was a skilled trade electrician.

So I guess the labor of those employees or the vehicles they produced don't count enough to classify the plant as being open during 2009. And the explanation you offer to support such a conclusion is because that is how some of the media has chosen to report it.

What was different about the plant in Dec of 2008 vs April of 2009 other than a piece of paper that said that the plant needed to be closed? Other plants that were slated for closure were saved and remained open during the bailout, remember? So why couldn't Obama have gone to bat for the Janesville plant? Especially after making a speech to those workers?

And where was Obama to march with the union protestors during the Wisconsin capitol protests? Didn't he promise to march in the picket lines with his union supporters? He didn't even visit Wisconsin during the recall battle, despite visiting both Illinois and Minnesota on the campaign trail, remember?

Try thinking for yourself instead of allowing the media to think for you.

The plans to close it were set long before Obama took office. Ryan's nose got so long it is surprising he didn't gouge someone's eye out in the front row.

Can't you Republicans ever except blame for anything and stop pinning things that you did on others -- such as the slowing economy?

Not surprised but you missed the entire context of what Ryan was saying Keith. lalalalalalallalalalalal keep those fingers in your ears.

What he was trying to do was give the impression that Obama closed the plant, which is only true if taken literally.

Again, the plant stopped production before it was closed, which makes a plant effectively closed.

You guys want to have it both ways. If Obama personally intervened, you would accuse him of running GM. Of course in the first half of 2009, Obama had a damned lot on his plate, trying to save this economy, which he did.

Yet another example of why we can't respect or rely on what you people say.

You can say what you think he was trying to say all day long.
Or you can look at what he said.

Live in reality

@Schmitzy -

"Again, the plant stopped production before it was closed, which makes a plant effectively closed."

Is that some kind of twisted liberal logic? If the plant stopped production, then how do you explain the light and medium duty trucks that were produced at the plant and came rolling out the factory doors ready for sale up until June of 2009 pursuant to the Isuzu contract?

Stopped production but was still turning out product - honestly, how does a liberal reconcile this?

Do those vehicles somehow not count as being produced for some reason?

Please explain Schmitzy!

We should hold everyone accountable! In this era of communication it's unacceptable for us to allow politicos to lay down spin when we can fact-check it so easily. Americans have a unique opportunity in our history to keep candidates' and elected officials' feet to the fire in terms of honesty and spin. Stop lying to us, we will find out the truth. And if you are lying, we will hold you accountable by not voting for you, voting you out, or if your lies are egregious, recall you (when possible).

Problem is, many Americans aren't taking the time to do this. We owe it to ourselves and our country to keep them honest.

Both Romney and Ryan have recanted from previously-held views. Romney plans to bring back a host of Bush-era hacks who helped bring us The Great Recession. Romney did not make friends in England--how could he reasonably be expected to deal with Iran, North Korea? Ryan is fueled by the utterly selfish Objectivist philosophy of atheist Ayn Rand. Surely we can do better that these two.

@Bren -

So why does the left continue to deny the real facts about the GM plant closure, the Obama auto bailout, Obamacare, Medicare, the national debt, state debt, local municipalities across the country declaring bankruptcy, etc?

Because of la la lalallalalalalallala

@Steve...You you understand the definition of mature? Grow up son or let the adults speak.

Mr. Hoffa, please note: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/aug/29/night-two-tampa-running-mate-and-more/

Politifact, center rating column, Paul Ryan: "Says President Barack Obama broke his promise to keep a Wisconsin GM plant from closing." Rating: FALSE.

What was that rating? FALSE. Not true. FALSE. Not half-true. It was FALSE.

So stop emulating Paul Ryan/Rand and trying to lay down FALSEhoods. The Janesville plant lie has been debunked, tagged and bagged. This meme is dead.

@Bren -

There's a lot more involved than what Politifact has dug up in its little expose. And how can you trust them when even they admit:

"The plant was effectively shut down on Dec. 23, 2008, when GM ceased production of SUVs there and laid off 1,200 workers. (Several dozen workers stayed on another four months to finish an order of small- to medium-duty trucks for Isuzu Motors.)

So, the plant closed while Bush was still in office, about a month before Obama was inaugurated."

The plant had people working, turning out a product after Obama took office, and yet somehow, they still state that it was closed under Bush? Why? Just because they decided to put those workers and the products they produced into parentheticals as opposed to in the regular body of the sentence?

Come on Bren - I know you have a brain, so you may want to use it to actually think for yourself!

If people are working, turning out a product, then how can you honestly not call the plant as being OPEN??? Explain!

Under Politifact's adopted standard here, any factory that isn't operating at full capacity - three shifts 24-7-52, is considered to be effectively shut down and closed. By definition, most of the factories in this country and world are then effectively closed or shut down, are they not?

Liberal logic and the acceptance to relegate the duty of independent analysis and thought to arbitrary third parties - I'll definitely never get it!

Real victory on November 6th by Ryan/Romney and the GOP nation wide will undoubtedly bring about real tears of triumph and victory for anyone who worked hard on such on an effort!

Maybe he knows something about his pending indictment.

@keith everyone know everything about the case against Walker, because the DA is leaking everything. I did notice he did slow down his "leaks" since Walker won the recall, but if a journalist calls he will still let everything he has on WAlker out.

It's that large, "conservative" amygdala at work.

@Brittany -

If you're an analyst as you claim to be, then why don't you address the questions that I posed to you?

Show us an analysis defending your so-called objective facts about the plant closure.

1) Why don't the labor of those employees or the vehicles they produced count enough to classify the plant as being open during 2009?

2) Is every plant that isn't running at full potential capacity in this country, three shifts 24-7-52, defined as being closed or shut down according to the definition that you've apparently chosen to adopt in regards to such issue?

3) What was different about the plant in Dec of 2008 or April of 2009 vs when Obama gave the speech, other than a piece of paper that said that the plant needed to be closed?

4) Other plants that were slated for closure were saved and remained open during the bailout, remember? So why couldn't Obama have gone to bat for the Janesville plant? Especially after making a speech to those workers?

I await your analysis to these questions.

"If I can recall, in the auto bailout hearings, the big three automobile company executives and those who were in the automobile industry were tasked with giving their recommendations and plans on how and where to cut costs."

And those plans had to meet the approval of Obama's cars czar in order to receive the federal assistance, remember?

So if Obama really wanted to go to bat for Janesville assembly, he probably could have. After all, other plants that were slated for closure in those plans/recommendations, ended up remaining open after the bailout was approved and the funds received by the automakers - especially after the UAW submitted its recommendations and demands to the administration during those negotiations, remember? Entire lines that were slated to move to Mexico or elsewhere in the world ended up staying here.

And why did Obama think it important that the UAW be involved in those negotiations? What does the UAW know or care about market forces or where a company need to its cut its costs to remain globally competitive? Did the UAW have members on the GM Board of Directors? No, they did not? So why did Obama care so much about what the UAW had to say or wanted out of these bailouts?

And without Obama interjection, would GM really be producing the Volt, despite dismal sales by all accounts and a huge loss per unit sold ever since it went into production?

COME ON!!!

You claim to be an analyst - so perform an analysis and think!

Geeeze Hoffa, bully much? It's time you get over it. You sound super bitter that the plant closed because it once employed your father. The point is, and maybe you should ask GM for yourself, if your so hell bent on getting one, is that it didn't make good business sense to them, Obama, their cousins and whoever, to keep THAT plant open. Don't you think Obama would have insisted it stay open if it were otherwise?. He was saving our auto industry, just for the mere fact that they employed thousands and thousands of people and so did their suppliers. It was ABOUT JOBS, were is your memory on that?

@Pamela -

Not bitter at all - my father had his 30 years in and retired.

So how come other plants that were also slated for closure miraculously remain open after the bailout was finalized by Obama's cars czar? If those plants were good enough to remain open, many of which required much more re-tooling than Janesville, then why didn't he go to bat for Janesville?

Carter saved Chrysler under Iaccoca back in '79 with a straight up interest bearing loan with a defined repayment schedule, remember? The loans were repaid in full with interest ahead of schedule. That's how G W Bush set up the bailouts that Ryan voted in favor of. Just like in the Carter bailout, the taxpayers would have gotten all their money back and even made money off the interest payments.

Under Obama's perverted restructuring of the bailouts, the taxpayers lose out on billions while the UAW, Italians (Fiat), Canadians, and large private corp interests were allowed to profit at the taxpayer's loss.

Why was that necessary? As a liberal, why doesn't that upset you? Why couldn't Obama have just followed the successful Carter bailout model?

Didn't Obama promise transparency? Those bailouts were not transparent at all. Didn't Obama promise to close the WH to lobbyists and special interests? And yet, the UAW was there nearly every day during the auto bailout process.

Obama LIED and cost us billions to appease his friends and you're OK with that.

In Hoffa's opinion, that's pretty SICK!!!

Mr. Hoffa, enough. The bailout saved approximately 1 million GM and related jobs during the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. Of course things aren't going to get back to normal within one presidential term because the recession wasn't a sudden occurrence but a build up over years. The Janesville slide was also occurring for years, as evidenced by Obama's appearance at the plant and near-total operations shutdown at the end of the Bush administration. Please be logical and sensible about this. I'd like to see what Paul Ryan and Scott Walker have done to promote Janesville to GM and/or the White House. That would be very helpful.

@Bren -

Carter saved Chrysler under Iaccoca back in '79 with a straight up interest bearing loan with a defined repayment schedule, remember? The loans were repaid in full with interest ahead of schedule. That's how G W Bush set up the bailouts that Ryan voted in favor of. Just like in the Carter bailout, the taxpayers would have gotten all their money back and even made money off the interest payments.

Under Obama's perverted restructuring of the bailouts, the taxpayers lose out on billions while the UAW, Italians (Fiat), Canadians, and large private corp interests were allowed to profit at the taxpayer's loss.

Why was that necessary? As a liberal, why doesn't that upset you? Why couldn't Obama have just followed the successful Carter bailout model?

Didn't Obama promise transparency? Those bailouts were not transparent at all. Didn't Obama promise to close the WH to lobbyists and special interests? And yet, the UAW was there nearly every day during the auto bailout process.

Answer those questions and I won't mention it anymore.

It's typical of Bren to accept a sweeping generalization as the reality of a situation, while ignoring/ducking the tough questions - should I really be surprised that she won't address the questions that I've posited here?

Of course not, because if she was honest, she'd have to admit that Obama was wrong and Bren can't do that, can she?

Spoken like a man who allows the media to do his thinking for him - Congrats Schmitzy!

If we can survive Obama/biden, then Romney/Ryan is a cakewalk. We can stop throwing money away on failing busnesses (I know Bush started this, but Obama should have stopped it and Romney will stop it, ) stop forcing a bad healthcare law down the throats of small and midsize busnesses and do real healthcare reform, and get a spine back in the office who does not appologize to the world for us but leads the world through example.

@Brittany -

"Why would he?"

Gee, I don't know - maybe because he was the guy that stood up in front of all those autoworkers and made a lofty speech about possibly being able to keep the plant open for a hundred more years with government assistance, and then after he won the election he provided the government assistance that he referenced in the speech.

That's just a logical analysis, but I guess that everyone should have just realized that Obama was a typical lying politician making lofty speeches, right?

Ryan never did anything like that though, did he?

And no, it's not about any talking points - the Dems were the ones who made issue of Ryan's use of the Janesville plant closing in his speech, remember?

Shifting the subject to high-speed rail - yeah, your bias has been exposed!

Analyst my rear end - nothing but a typical liberal stooge.

So, you're going with the Republicans want dirty air and dirty water rhetoric?

Yeah, like we all haven't heard that one a zillion times before!

Way to ignore context.

Come on Hoffa, you've got to admit that common sense dictates that mankind is becoming a fungus covering this planet with it's population boom and what we spew into it and above it, has an effect. To open the flood gates on oil, would be a step backwards wouldn't you agree? I too wish we didn't have to rely on foriegn oil, but I think it is in, all of our best interest to find cleaner alternatives. Nothing will speed up that process better than to slowly turn off the spigot of oil, as opposed to turning it back to full blast. Are you for clean air and water, and I mean not just clean water, but the availability of ENOUGH clean water for the future?

@Pamela -

Hoffa and conservatives are all for cleaner and better alternatives. But we also don't ignore the fact that such technologies are not yet viable. So in the meantime, we have to do something or kill our economy.

Obama wants to continue making the Middle East rich, while Romney proposed opening up some of our own resources. Common sense says to keep our money here at home and put Americans to work on viable solutions - not subsidizing jobs at $300k each that end end up going bankrupt after a couple years and taking billions of taxpayers dollars down the toilet with them!

What does your car run on? If you're a Democrat, then I hope whatever you drive was assembled with pride by the UAW. If not, then you're little more than a hypocrite!

@Brittany -

Never said that Hoffa couldn't handle a change of subject - just pointing out 1) that it's a typical liberal strategy used when losing an argument on the merits, and 2) that the proposed subject is not appropriate for this board as the WI high-speed rail was not mentioned in Ryan's speech.

So, you're going with the give Obama a pass but continue to blast Ryan for his shortcomings line.

To each their own - all Hoffa can do is encourage you to think for yourself. It's up to you to actually do it.

Have a nice trip and holiday!

Oooo.... I am jealous! Enjoy the scenery, the shops, the cherries and the fish boils :)

What's your definition of a Christian?

Randy1949, perhaps only faith systems that believe in the Magical Secretion? ; )

@ MHH, Why the question? Ohhhhh, I get it. You think he is a closet muslim, and has worked undercover all his life as a Christian, for the day he becomes our President to take us all down, eh??????

Perhaps you'd better look up the definition of socialism if you missed it in high school civics class, then compare and contrast the auto bailout with that form of government compared to our democratic republic...

@Bren -

There are a lot of definitions that you should also look up. For starters, you may want to check out the word 'closed,' as it's impossible for a plant to be closed, according the definition of that word, if workers are inside and still producing a finished product.

Based on your assertions, you obviously have no idea what that word actually means!

Give us your examples on unbiased media sources, please.

@Randy1949 -

Why rely on media to do the thinking for you? Why do you prefer that all your information come with someone else's perspective? Didn't you learn anything from earlier today?

Go to the PRIMARY SOURCE and THINK FOR YOURSELF!!!!

@JRH -- So I'm to believe what each candidate says (primary source) as opposed to a factual correction by a news source? I don't rely on media to do my thinking for me. I rely on them to give me facts, especially if the original party reported a fact incorrectly. And then I draw my own conclusions.

I'm especially not relying on Mr. "I meant what I said when I said it, whatever I said".

@Randy1949 -

When did Hoffa ever say to limit your sources to only the candidates? There are other primary sources out there, aren't there?

Like the ACA and related S. Court decision.

Obama - My health care bill will not contain a mandate and I will not raise taxes on the middle/working classes.

Well, if you've looked at the ACA or related S Court decision at all, you'd clearly see that Obama LIED about both of those promises.

I didn't realize that I'd have to teach a course in how to use primary sources.

"I rely on them to give me facts, especially if the original party reported a fact incorrectly."

What candidate are you referring to that used an erroneous fact? And for some reason, you trust the media to correctly identify an incorrect fact and tell you the correct fact?

WOW!

Hey Randy1949, I'd like to sell you the Brooklyn Bridge! I'll sell it to you real cheap!

If you're talking about when the Janesville GM Assembly plant closed, Ryan is correct - it happened under Obama.

Workers were working and finished vehicles rolled off the line in 2009. This is undisputed and I don't see how anyone can claim that the plant was closed with such activities taking place inside its doors.

Does that labor not count? Do those vehicles that were produced not count? Isn't that an insult to the men and women who provided that labor and built those vehicles to ignore their efforts and results and claim that the plant was actually closed?

COME ON!!!

@JRH -- So when, exactly was the decision made to move most of the production out of Janesville and to shut down entirely once a contract to Isuzu had been complete? Am I mistaken that it was June of 2008?

What were candidate Barack Obama's exact words in February of 2008? Did he promise to keep that plant open? How much control did he have about a decision made before he had even won the election? Who was President in June of 2008, and more importantly, who was the Congressman for that area? Wouldn't they have had a little more clout at the time?

@Randy1949 -

"So when, exactly was the decision made to move most of the production out of Janesville and to shut down entirely once a contract to Isuzu had been complete? Am I mistaken that it was June of 2008?"

When did Hoffa ever dispute this? And why does that date matter - it was a decision on a piece of paper in GM's Detroit headquarters. Is GM not allowed to change its mind about plant closings once they are made?

It was Obama that was offering Hope and Change. He wanted those workers to HOPE that if they helped him become elected that he would be able to CHANGE GM's mind about closing the plant.

And if Obama didn't have the clout to do so, then why did he need to use a cars czar that was capable of approving or disapproving of GM's and Chrysler's plans for the future in qualifying them to receiving bailout funds? Other plants that were also slated for closure miraculously remained open after the bailout deal was finalized, remember?

But yeah, Obama did use the qualifier "plants like this one," so I guess it was naive of those autoworkers to presume that he was talking about their plant specifically. But don't you as a human being find that a bit shifty and deceitful - come on, you claim to be a straight shooter when it comes to fairness.

Bush had a bailout that modeled Carter's successful bailout of Chrysler under Iaccoca back in '79 ready to go and Ryan voted in favor of it. Obama perverted it into a crony deal with the UAW, Italians, and Canadians with the use a cars czar.

And honestly, what could have Ryan have done? He did pressure the Doyle administration to offer nearly $195M in state based aide to keep the plant open, but hey, I guess that doesn't count for anything because it wasn't successful right? Obama didn't offer a dime to keep the plant open after he took office.

Nope. He told the truth. In fact the AP article contradicts its very own article it wrote in 2009. Too funny!!

CNN agrees.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/30/politics/pol-fact-check-ryan-gm/index.html?iref=allsearch

CNN has been accused of having both conservative and liberal bias. I do not consider CNN an unbiased news source.

Once again, here are the actual speech/article excerpts concerning Janesville as presented by NPR:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/08/30/160320776/janesville-debate-dissecting-ryans-claim-obamas-promise-the-facts

@Bren -

My father worked in the plant in March of 2009. Vehicles were coming off the line and rolled out the factory doors ready to ship off and be sold.

How can you call a plant that has workers in it producing a finished product closed?

You're sick if you believe that - I suggest you see a mental health professional immediately!

Sorry Bren, but the errors in the Politifact article are corrected in the CNN article. You can attack the messenger, but not the message. That's apparent by your drive-by attempt at reputation assassination, without refuting a single word it said.

In fact the Politifact article try to hang its article on something that Ryan didn't say. How long DID Obama say the Janesville plant would be open? 97 MORE YEARS!

Are you good at math, Bren? Is 100 years more or less than 14 months?

@ the Hoffa, Why do you say Bren is mentally ill for thinking that a plant can be considered closed and still have employees working there? It happens all the time. I even worked for a business that did the very same thing. The GM Isuzu truck order was a loose end there, not a continuation of doing business.

@Pamela -

You're spinning reality to suit a partisan agenda - and yes, Hoffa considers that to be indicative of a severe mental disorder.

So fulfilling a contract obligation is not a continuation of business? REALLY????

Come on! You're spinning more than Paul Van Dyk at a rave party!

If finished product is rolling off the line, which it was, then the plant was OPEN, by the definition of the word. According to Websters, the word 'closed' in relation to business, means "that no business activities are being conducted."

You want to redefine a word to suit your own partisan agenda - that's SICK!!!

Please get some HELP!!!!

@Pamela,

Hoffa probably says that because that's what GM says, and that what the newspapers say, and because GM payed people to work there and payed taxes on the profits?

@morninmist -

When did Ryan mention Bush in relation to the auto-bailouts in the speech he gave at the convention? And when did Bush ever stand before those plant workers and give a speech implying that his policies would keep the plant open for a hundred more years?

And yet somehow Ryan is a liar? You really are a moron!

Obama doubled down on his promise to keep the plant open in October of 2008:

http://www.uppermichiganssource.com/news/story.aspx?id=205482#.UEJjZCLQvWG

Obama deceptively fooled those autoworkers into a false sense of HOPE that if they supported him in the election that he could CHANGE their situation. It was a dirty move by any standard!

And the plant produced vehicles up until June of 2009, fulfilling the Isuzu contract, thus it was open during the Obama administration despite the LIES coming from your side. I don't see how your side can qualify a plant that has employees working to produce a finished product as being closed - it's an insult to the men and women, including my UAW father, who stayed at the plant and built those vehicles! Shame on you morninmist!

HEY Hoffa
LYING Ryan just can't stop Lying. He has spent the last 2 days trying to spin his LIES.

One Wisconsin Now ‏@onewisconsinnow

Ryan lied about marathon prowess. Marathon was not held outside GM Janesville plant that closed under Bush. http://deadsp.in/OC7TW3 #wiunion

@morninmist -

An article of unnamed sources and no direct quotes, but your going with it as being true.

Not to mention the pure idiocy of the whole thing - you can't attack his policies so instead you try to attack the man.

You're really starting to get pathetic misty!

Question - After Romney/Ryan decimate Obama/Biden the same way Walker decimated Barrett in round 2, are you going to disappear from the Patch again for a while to cry alone in your own special place?

Hoffa

Here.

Love the title.

James Rowen ‏@jer45

#wipolitics,#paulryan,#PED's - - Paul Ryan caught doping - - http://thepoliticalenvironment.blogspot.com/2012/09/paul-ryan-caught-using-performance.html

BTW - Thanks for illustrating the problems with liberals so very well. Instead of being concerned with how to fix our economic situation and jump start the economy, you guys are more concerned about Paul Ryan's athleticism, which is exactly why your Party is so very bad at almost everything it attempts to do!

Obama's proven that he's more concerned about his golf handicap and jump-shot than doing his job, otherwise he wouldn't have given up on a budget after the one he proposed failed to gain a single vote from members of his own Party!

And Biden still believes that the word 'JOBS' is a three letter word.

Get ready for the smack-down when Ryan destroys Biden in the debate!

Lying in front of national TV and his family is wrong.

ABWisdom ‏@adbridgeforth

Fifteen Euphemisms The M.S.M Is Using To Avoid Calling Ryan A Flat Out Liar http://n360.to/OIF7D3 #p2 #p2b

@morninmist -

That was a parody. Apparently you were fooled the same way in which John Nichols of The Nation magazine is often fooled by parodies.

Just proves how partisan blind you and Nichols truly are! You're addicted to your sides kool-aide!

@morninmist -

Apparently, you have no idea what the definition of 'lie' is. Here are some examples of real lies:

- I will half the deficit in four years.
- I will close Gitmo.
- My health care bill will not have a mandate.
- I will not raise taxes on the middle and working classes.
- I will end the wars on day 1.
- My stimulus will lower unemployment to below 8%.
- I will work to retool the Janesville assembly plant and keep it open for a hundred more years.
- I will cut the cost of a typical family's health insurance premium by up to $2,500 a year.
- Half of all cars purchased by the federal government will be plug-in hybrids or all-electric by 2012.
- I will upgrade our infrastructure.
- I will establish a low carbon fuel standard.
- I will provide at least $50 billion by 2013 for the global fight against HIV/AIDS.

Seriously morninmist, I could provided literally dozens and dozens of comments filled with nothing but Obama lies.

I know what a lie is and LyingRyan keeps on lying

@Progress2day #LyingRyan Lies about climbing CO "Fourteener's" Mt's 40x ha ha. http://rootriversiren.blogspot.com/2012/09/paul-ryans-living-nightmare-just-wont.html?spref=tw #wiunion @PurrpleCatMama @bluecheddar1

@JeffSimpson7 http://cognidissidence.blogspot.com/2012/08/paul-ryan-scott-walker-disgust-me.html @govwalker @reppaulryan @gop @reince U have embarrassed WI with ur plethora of lies #wiunion

Ask lyingRyan. You might get the truth! *NOT!

@Progress2day #LyingRyan Lies about climbing CO "Fourteener's" Mt's 40x ha ha. http://rootriversiren.blogspot.com/2012/09/paul-ryans-living-nightmare-just-wont.html?spref=tw #wiunion @PurrpleCatMama @bluecheddar1

@morninmist -

Congratulations - you win an award:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WltdNExOO6k

@morninmist -

"Inclan began her current RNC post in January 2012, and has worked in Republican politics since well before Obama’s 2008 election."

And yet, the article cannot mention one thing that Inclan did for the Republicans prior to 2010.

Contrast to the people used in Obama's ads claiming to be former Republicans, who's political donation histories show proof positive that they were always really Democrats.

FYI - a lot of people that supported Obama in 2008 have since switched sides - that's the kind of dissent that failure tends to produce.

Once again, another post that misty obviously didn't think about before deciding to post it here!