Not completely. "So, though Ryan might have been incorrect in the August 16 telling, he cleaned it up for Wednesday's convention. Obama said what Ryan said he said.
But to fairly evaluate Obama's statement, at least two pieces of context -- missing from Ryan's account -- would be useful: First, that Obama wasn't telling this plant that he'd save it from a pending closure. He wasn't addressing a plant that he knew to be closing, because the closure announcement didn't come until four months after his speech. Second, although the plant's last bit of production stopped early in Obama's presidency and the plant remains closed, the closure was planned before Obama became president.
Verdict: True, but incomplete." http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/30/politics/pol-fact-check-ryan-gm/index.html?iref=allsearch

When 'incomplete' is used to imply broken promises, it's duplicitous.

Here's a link to Politifact: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/aug/29/night-two-tampa-running-mate-and-more/

Here's a link to the NPR analysis (including news/article sources and quotes): http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/08/30/160320776/janesville-debate-dissecting-ryans-claim-obamas-promise-the-facts

The guy embarrassed our state by standing at the podium with the nation and world as his audience, and laid down a ground cover of b.s. Why not place the irritation where it belongs, with the guy who told the lies?

@Randy,

Either the plant is now open and will remain open for the next 97 years, or it is not open.

Here's what the article faults Ryan for, which is barely worth mentioning because Ryan was only off by 2 months:

Quote:

""The only thing Ryan appears to have gotten technically wrong in Wednesday's version was saying that the plant didn't last another year. It did last another year -- more like 14 months -- if the Isuzu line and its 57 workers count.

So, though Ryan might have been incorrect in the August 16 telling, he cleaned it up for Wednesday's convention. Obama said what Ryan said he said.""

@Bren -

Did you miss the headline of this blog? It asserts that the so-called fact checkers aren't always accurate.

And yet, you open your comment with a link to one of the alleged inaccurate fact checkers!

Boy, did you ever miss the point!

Please explain to Hoffa - how do you qualify a factory that has people working inside turning out a finished product, which even Politifact acknowledges, as being closed?

I'm just totally perplexed by this! Did the definition of the word closed suddenly change?

If people are working, turning out a finished product available for sale, then it definitely meets the definition of being OPEN, and not closed, doesn't it?

Ryan's untruth is implying that Barack Obama had any influence over a decision to close the plant announced two months after his visit there, five months before he was elected, and half a year before he took office.. If anyone had any influence, it was the current President and the current Congressman for that district -- Paul Ryan.

@Randy,

It appears that you are grasping at straws. What Obama was saying was that if he was elected his wonderful plans would kick in, enabling the plant to stay open for 100 years! HOLY COW!

No one, including Ryan, said that Obama closed the plant, nor has anyone even come close to suggesting that. Rather, the point was that his wonderful plan failed. Obama DID NOT KEEP THE PANT OPEN WITH HIS PLAN.

But come tot think of it, Obama did nothing to influence GM to keep the plant open when he was sitting at the table during the bailout.

@Luke -- You say: "So, though Ryan might have been incorrect in the August 16 telling, he cleaned it up for Wednesday's convention. Obama said what Ryan said he said."

Here's what Barack Obama actually said: "And I believe 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. "

I guess the government at the time was not there to support them. By the time Obama took office, the decision to close the plant had already been made half a year before. And Ryan is working for the guy who is the king of shutting down plants to 'save' businesses. The same guy who said the auto industry should fail entirely.

Randy,

You don't get it. The plant was closed while Obama was in office. He said that the plant would be open for 100 years. That applies to both good times and bad. Is the pant open or closed?

"But come tot think of it, Obama did nothing to influence GM to keep the plant open when he was sitting at the table during the bailout."

He did more than Romney would have done. The ability of you and Hoffa and Divilbiss to argue that black is white truly amazes me.

@Randy1949 -

"Ryan's untruth is implying that Barack Obama had any influence over a decision to close the plant announced two months after his visit there, five months before he was elected, and half a year before he took office.. If anyone had any influence, it was the current President and the current Congressman for that district -- Paul Ryan."

Yeah, because once GM made a decision about closure, it certainly couldn't undo it, could it?

But wait, how did all of those other plants that were also on the close list remain open only after the bailout was finalized? Now I'm confused because Randy asserted that once a decision had been made, it was final, so what happened in the case of those other plants?

I'm very confused here Randy, could you please explain.

No, Luke, you are the one who doesn't get what an 'if' means in a conditional statement'. You also don't seem to understand what Ryan was implying with his selective reporting of the facts. And that's why you probably fall for this nonsense and support a man who made his living 'streamlining' businesses to increase profits.

@Randy,

Hardly. A controlled bankruptcy is hardly less, considering that Romney could have attached any strings he wanted.

The fact is that Obama abandoned the other unions in favor of the UAW by keeping only that union's plants open, but not the the plants of the other unions, not to mention the fact that he did noting to help the Delphi workers. If Obama had wanted to negotiate for Janeville, he has demonstrated that he had both the means and ability to do so. As it stands, he merely signed whatever the UAW set before him. Screw the other unions.

@Randy1949 -

Did Ryan or Romney ever make a speech to the plant workers stating "And I believe 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?"

NO.

The point isn't what Romney or Ryan would have done, although Ryan did go to bat for the plant on numerous occasions, pressuring the Doyle administration to offer nearly $195M in state aid to keep the plant open, and we don't know what Romney would have done with the plant in his structured bankruptcy because no one ever asked him - only the FACT that Obama LIED!!!

When Obama said "you," who was he talking about? Autoworkers at other plants? And when Obama said "this plant," was he talking about some other plant? And did the government step in with the assistance that Obama was referring to? It sure as hell did - $85B+ in assistance! Other GM plants that were closed and/or on the closed list did miraculously re-open or remain open after his bailout was finalized, remember?

So, spin all you'd like, but Ryan was 100% accurate whether you'd care to admit to it or not!

@Randy1949 -

"No, Luke, you are the one who doesn't get what an 'if' means in a conditional statement'. You also don't seem to understand what Ryan was implying with his selective reporting of the facts. And that's why you probably fall for this nonsense and support a man who made his living 'streamlining' businesses to increase profits."

When Romney was governor of MA, he did not outsource jobs. In fact, unemployment went down under his tenure, and incomes of those working went up.

Are people incapable of wearing different pants and working different jobs requiring different skills in Randy's world?

Randy obviously thinks that people aren't capable of successfully engaging in a multitude of different careers throughout their lives, requiring a multitude of different skillsets.

Earth to Randy - people do it all the time.

Stop believing the Dem propaganda machine. Think for yourself using primary sources.

@Randy,

I understand what "if" means. I understand that Obama did not deliver on it.

Yes, Hoffa, I'll go to sleep tonight with that nice complimentary 'pod' the GOP sent me next to my bed, and I'm sure I'll feel better in the morning.

Bad news, Bren. At the bottom of the page on the NPR story you linked to it now refers to an AP story that quotes Obama saying, "...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."

http://www.uppermichiganssource.com/news/story.aspx?id=205482#.UEGMoMGPX85

Another broken promise.

@Luke -

Randy1949 and Bren will either ignore the facts or spin them into irrelevance. It's clear that both of them are already set in believing that Obama can do no wrong and that Ryan is nothing but a liar.

They will argue that the word "like" implies that Obama meant plants other than the Janesville plant, despite the facts that 1) a commonly accepted synonym of the word 'like' is 'such as,' and 2) other plants already and/or slated to be closed were miraculously spared thanks to Obama's crooked bailout deal.

Bottom line is that Obama definitely didn't exploit those autoworkers for votes by giving them a false HOPE of CHANGE to their situation - at least not according to Bren and Randy anyway.

Isn't it obvious that these people will just ignore or discredit the facts to support their own partisan agenda?

It's really quite sad when you stop and think about it!

@Randy1949 -

"complimentary 'pod' the GOP sent me next to my bed"

So now the GOP represents the invasion of the body snatchers ;-)

@JRH -- I guess you're too young to remember the SNL skit where members of a group of friends unaccountable start planning to vote for Ronald Reagan. "Here, take this complimentary Ronald Reagan pod . . ."

@Randy... Got a youtube link on that SNL skit? I'm old enough, but don't remember it.

I'll go check. There are some real classics I've been unable to find -- "The Lonesome Trail" song is one of them. The pod sketch was with the original cast, so it's that old.

Hurricane a coming..
Ironically as the republicans convention Winds down, will their Freudian slips be exposed. . Could this be an Ominous warning of what they represent. Republican Hurricanes have been plaguing our Main Street USA since 1970. Last one, hurricane Bush, damaged our Main Street USA to the tune of $11 Trillion for repairs. Hmmm
Farewell: what’s your take on this... Hmmmm
How long will it take to burnish, cleanse and repair? Hard to tell with all the sabotaging efforts, that the republicans continuously promote to our Main Street USA.
Republicans are exhibitionist of a no, no, no leadership party. Observe when Wall Street was bailed out. They partied and rewarded their executives, with $ millions of tax free dollars. Same executives’ that FAILED our economy. USA rewards FAILURES? Bailouts of the golden parachutist. Elitist Welfare?
Main Street USA gets one lump of coal to sustain them through wintry Christmases.
Now Nov. 6 -2012 comes rolling by, we hear from the Cronyism from their fortress on Wall Street…BAH HUMBUG. “Let them die. It will reduce the surplus populace”
Anybody care for piece of cake and TEA?

Federal Government role requires its involvement to provide security to the welfare of its constituents‘. Security, Health, Education and so on. Liberal International Free Trade Markets competitors that we need to compete with, demands an educated healthy society. A reduction in organization signals to our competitors a chink in our armor. Observe in the last 80 years how less government, contributed to deregulations which in turn was abused to the advantage of a few. Increasing the income inequality gap further and more vulnerable to our competitors’ . Smaller government is the Myth that history and nature has proven ,as the incorrect direction to our ability to survive, within the complexities of societies. Less government and law is a desirable goal ,for the lawless criminals of all societies.

@Randy1949 -

Hoffa isn't very big on SNL to begin with - sorry.

Was Hoffa even born yet during the classic first five years of SNL? This skit must have happened at the end of that period, right before they replaced the entire cast.

@Randy1949 -

Hoffa was born in '78.

If Hoffa was born in '78, then the skit I'm referencing was way past Little Hoffa's bedtime.

Maybe Obama meant that the front door or a window would be left open.

Ryan’s tax plan is Robin Hood in reverse. He wants to cut taxes by $4.6 trillion over the next decade, but only for corporations and the rich, like giving families earning more than $1 million a year a $300,000 tax cut. And to pay for them, he'd raise taxes on middle- and lower-income households and butcher social service programs that help middle- and working-class Americans
Ryan Budget Would Raise Some Taxes; Guess Who Gets Hit?," Off the Charts, April 12, 2012 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=278692&id=48818-18896842-LWo0J9x&t=6
"Middle class could face higher taxes under Republican plan, analysis finds," The Washington Post, June 19, 2012
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=278693&id=48818-18896842-LWo0J9x&t=7

JRH -

Reince Priebus Screw-us Maximus is also sending you an “empty chair” for your outstanding and unwavering sycophantic support of anything GOP… practice, practice, practice and you could possibly be a great as Clint…

http://www.freep.com/article/20120831/BUSINESS0101/308310169/The-facts-about-Janesville-GM-plant-s-closure

@John Wilson -

Your so-called fact check link does not include all the facts. For starters, why does it make no mention of the Isuzu contract?

http://www.gazettextra.com/news/2009/apr/21/thursday-last-day-production-isuzu-line-comes-end/

Or how about when Obama doubled down on his promise to keep Janesville open in October of 2008 - that's also missing?

http://www.uppermichiganssource.com/news/story.aspx?id=205482#.UEGMoMGPX85

Obviously, you also missed the point about the headline of this blog - that the so-called 'fact checkers' are unreliable.

Bet hey, seeing as how you so willing trust the media to their job accurately and in an unbiased fashion, then you'll probably also trust me if I offered to sell you the Brooklyn Bridge! Come on, I'll give you a great price ;-)

Perhaps some remedial reading comprehension and investigative fact finding classes would be of benefit to you!

Ryan's proposed budget would cripple the economy. He'd slash spending deeply, which would not only slow job growth, but shock the economy and cost 1 million of us our jobs in 2013 alone and kill more than 4 million jobs by the end of 2014
Ryan's Budget, Robin Hood in reverse," Economic Policy Institute
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=278939&id=48818-18896842-LWo0J9x&t=4

Consider back in 2003 republicans introduced , what many refer to as the “Poising Pill” of Health Care.
Government extended much needed Medicare drug benefits. A little provision was added to its extension. Provision PROHIBITS government from bargaining for prices on drugs! $50 Billion per year windfall to the pharmaceuticals. Imagine cost to premiums to cover that little bit added expenses. Where will they get it. Perhaps by reducing quality of Health Care. Thus your EMS was living on borrowed time.
Ahhh the republican way…. Who can complain? Its what ya’ll voted for, wasn’t it.
Lets see 9 X 50 = $450 Billion.. Hmmm Kinda of a leak there…

@Bernard -

You didn't address a single question raised in my post and yet you reply with a bunch of cut and paste off-topic nonsense.

You definitely prove the true intelligence of liberals!

Evolution versus Revolution.
Trading from its earliest origins have been an up down or miss opportunity.
Old saying “We can put a man on the moon but we can’t…..” Science has evolved along the way and yet the unstable markets persist? What factors contribute to unreliable markets and their failures?
Observing recent activities of our global markets may produce and illuminate a source. Common denominator through various cultures and sovereignties. What could it be? Hmmm. Perhaps all this communicating amongst the causes for their activities. One glaring message we can hear loud and clear. Inequality of laborers productivity distributions. Laborers discover a lost of consumption abilities. Dwindling abilities to produce as the fields remain empty and the machinery is idled. Liquidity of commerce has stagnated and now depletes. Where has all the liquid that laborers produced disappeared to? No more fuel to continue their labors and or to consume, they lay idle. Observing from their desert how the liquid has been bottled up within a narrow valley. Same valley they labored to fill just a short time ago.
All the liquid returns is from a narrow run off, that can not sustain their survival. Do they charge, destroy it? History has demonstrated the greatest lost of value will be amongst them. They prefer to evolutionize laws of abuse. Here they can retain the structures, that they have built and remove the ambiguities’ that produced this scenario.

@John Wilson -

Thank you for proving Hoffa right yet again!

It's obvious that people like you will just ignore, discredit, or spin the FACTS to support your own partisan agenda. That's what's really so profound!

It's clear that you are so steadfast in you own preconceived belief that Obama can do no wrong and that Ryan is nothing but a liar, that you cannot see clearly, even when the cold hard objective facts prove you wrong time and again.

Your inability to embrace reality in deference to your own twisted perception is what many mental health professionals would classify as a most serious condition. Perhaps it's time to admit that you do in fact have a problem and seek out the appropriate help.

Obama has been consistent with the philosophies of some of Marriner Eccles and FDR. Obama realized the importance of deficit spending to stimulate the economic recovery in the midst of chaos. The “Stimulus” established a floor for the financial markets protecting them from any further decline.
Bush in the last 17 months of his tenure markets losses 58% from peak to trough. Exposing a rolling 17-month period that never existed before. Historically greater loss than in any 17-month rolling range during the Great Depression.
Bush in the final 12 months of his administration lost 4.43 Million jobs which once again a historical marker not seen since the Great Depression. Obama created 4.3 million jobs to reduce the spiraling losses of jobs. 750,000 per month job losses was what Obama was handed in Jan. 2009. Slow but surely recovering as the investment of the “Stimulus” in the infrastructure of markets and corporations strengthen, to increase demand for laborers.

@Bernard -

None of your cut and paste ramblings are on topic - you have been flagged as being inappropriate.

Please try to keep your comments on topic.

Hoffa, that's Bernie's typical MO. Babble incoherent "facts", cite something from politi-fact or moveon.org , then draw some bizarre conclusion at the end.

Has anybody heard of Milton Friedman, please read his works. If this was required in schools we would be in a lot better shape. All the stimulus spending and printing of money will have a short term effect, one place is the stock market. However, at what cost. We have accumulated 5 trillion in debt and are on a path for Obama to accumulate more than all previous Presidents combined. That cost is now at about 235000 per family. I would certainly rather have that money than a 17% increase in the stock market. This debt and uncertainty is keeping unemployment high. We are on a path to end up like Greece. If that is what you want vote for Obama if you want free markets, smaller govt vote for Romney /Ryan Also check out that Dow reached a high under Bush

Bernard is a paid liberal troll that only ever posts off-topic cut and paste liberal nonsense to the boards in an effort to disrupt the flow of the on-topic conversation.

It's best to ignore him!

JMB –

Yes, JMB, the GOP is certainly fighting hard to support and protect this today; you are certainly correct…

The Need for Title X is Clear
Unintended Pregnancy

In the United States, almost half of all pregnancies are unintended. Half of unintended pregnancies end in abortion. (AGI, 1998)

The 10% of American women at risk of unintended pregnancy (those who do not want to be pregnant but are sexually active and fertile) who do not practice contraception account for 53% of all unintended pregnancies. (Institute of Medicine, 1995)
By the age of 45, American women, on average, will have had 1.42 unintended pregnancies. ("Unintended Pregnancy in the United State," Family Planning Perspectives, AGI, 1998)

Women spend more than 75% of their reproductive lives trying to avoid pregnancy. (Hope and Realities: Closing the Gap Between Women's Aspirations and Their Reproductive Experiences, AGI, 1995)

Dr. Paul Joseph Goebbels once stated that… “If you say something enough times over and over people will accept it as truth…”

At the very least, we know it works on you… and, of course, there is no WAR ON WOMEN...

Shifting the subject when losing a debate - liberal strategy 101!

The problem is Bernie, what do you consider "hoarding"? Give anyone, including "the rich" a dollar and what can they do with it? 1) spend it (stimulates economy), invest it (stimulates economy), or hid it under a pillow. How many of "the rich" are hiding money under a pillow? NONE! Conservative are smart enough to know that the best way to make money, is to invest money.

Investment creates wealth and puts money in the hands of people that have gone out and earned it,
from the investor,
to the small business owner selling a goods or services to the investor,
to the laborer providing the work.

There is no "hoarding" going on. Investors are being very cautious and making sure their investments are secure in these volatile times. What we need to do is get people back to work, and not at a cost of 109,777.78 per job!

@Lyle -

1) Obama gave a speech at the plant in Feb of 2008.

2) GM decided to close the plant in June of 2008.

3) Obama doubled down on his 'promise' to plant workers in October of 2008. He specifically cited the Janesville plant.

4) Obama won the election in November of 2008.

5) Heavy duty and retail truck production ended in Dec of 2008.

6) Obama was sworn into office in January of 2009.

7) Under Obama's bailout, other plants that had been closed or slated for closure re-opened or remained open.

8) Employees remained working in Janesville, turning out light and medium duty commercial trucks, fulfilling a contract with then partner Isuzu Motors of Japan, until June of 2009.

Obama was definitely trying to sell HOPE to the autoworkers, that if they supported his nomination, that he would CHANGE their situation. That's the only honest assessment that any reasonable person can draw about the original speech and the double down by Obama.

And if the plant has workers turning out a finished product, I don't see how you can't call that plant anything but being OPEN during the Obama administration. To say that it was closed is an insult to those workers who produced those final vehicles and it radically changes the definition of the word 'closed.' By that standard, any factory not producing three shifts a day 24-7-52 is considered closed or shut down. That just doesn't make any sense.

So tell me, who's spinning here?

@JRH....So What? This is meaningless rhetoric. Divelbiss couldn't write something at all until he hears what Belling has to say.

Lyle,

Is your comment an example of "meaningless rhetoric"? How does it compare to Hoffa's facts and figures?

In other words, do you have any content (i.e., anything empirical) to offer, or are you just letting off steam? If you are just letting of steam, then aren't you "being a waste of fine cyberspace"?

Lyle,

Spend some time reading the blog post linked below. I think you will find it useful. In fact, there is someone named Lyle Ruble that posted below that says some things about name-calling that you might find useful.

http://sussex.patch.com/blog_posts/how-to-address-hate-speech-and-ad-hominem

Like Janesville. That's what Obama actually said. If many people still can't afford to buy new cars I don't know how GM can expand to previous levels. Guys, you know that the federal government isn't running GM, don't you?

Scott Walker claimed that he WOULD create 250,000 new jobs by the end of his first term. You apologize for Walker's 6% achievement of that goal to-date. But when Obama says he will work to keep plants LIKE Janesville open you attack him as if he did a Walker and claimed he WOULD.

Wikipedia isn't a legitimate news source unless it has links to verifiable information. Under Janesville, WI it states, "In June, 2008, General Motors announced that it would end production of light-duty trucks at its Janesville assembly plant by the end of 2010,[16] and as part of GM's restructuring, the plant closed in December, 2008.[17] Sport-utility vehicle production ended on December 23 and the remaining medium-duty Isuzu assembly line ended operations on April 23, 2009, at which time the last 57 employees were laid off.[16] "

16: http://www.gazettextra.com/news/2009/apr/21/thursday-last-day-production-isuzu-line-comes-end/
17: dead link.

Another company also phased out of Janesville in 2009, Parker Pen Company.
http://host.madison.com/news/local/article_51d86c10-921d-5dc0-bbd8-9479f584fd01.html

You blame Obama for words said on a campaign stop. But two companies left Janesville under Ryan's watch. One's bad, the other's okay? Tilt!

@Bren -

James R Hoffa
11:48 pm on Friday, August 31, 2012

@Luke -

Randy1949 and Bren will either ignore the facts or spin them into irrelevance. It's clear that both of them are already set in believing that Obama can do no wrong and that Ryan is nothing but a liar.

They will argue that the word "like" implies that Obama meant plants other than the Janesville plant, despite the facts that 1) a commonly accepted synonym of the word 'like' is 'such as,' and 2) other plants already and/or slated to be closed were miraculously spared thanks to Obama's crooked bailout deal.

Bottom line is that Obama definitely didn't exploit those autoworkers for votes by giving them a false HOPE of CHANGE to their situation - at least not according to Bren and Randy anyway.

Isn't it obvious that these people will just ignore or discredit the facts to support their own partisan agenda?

It's really quite sad when you stop and think about it!

Thanks for proving Hoffa 100% CORRECT ;-)

@Lyle -

It was your buddies on the left that erroneously accused Ryan of lying. Perhaps you should be chastising them instead of Divelbiss.

@Bren -

1) Walker's term is not yet over, is it?

2) Obama doubled down in October on keeping the plant open.

http://www.uppermichiganssource.com/news/story.aspx?id=205482#.UEGMoMGPX85

3) I don't need sources to tell me that the Janesville plant produced vehicles in 2009, as my father worked at the plant in March of 2009 as finished vehicles continued to roll off the line. But there are plenty of sources available, including the Gazette article that you linked to in your erroneous rant, if you actually bothered to read it.

4) The controversy is about whether or not Ryan lied, which he did not according to all the available facts and the words of his speech. So quit trying to shift the subject, a liberal strategy used when losing a debate.

Just admit it!!!

@Bren,

Nice attempt to change the subject. The left has attacked Ryan for what he said. We have corrected the misinformation that the left has put out there by detailing the order of events.

Trying to change the subject doesn't change the fact that you are wrong.

Oh, I don't dispute your facts, JRH, I just don't agree with your conclusions. Ryan left out a significant point -- the announcement of the plant's closing in June 2008. Did he do so with an intent to deceive? Maybe yes, maybe no.

@Randy1949 -

Obama doubled down on his 'promise' in October of 2008, after the June announcement to close the plant. Additionally, other plants that had already been closed or were slated for closure miraculously re-opened or remained open after Obama's bailout went through, so obviously his administration did have some influence over GM's central planners otherwise why didn't those other plants remain closed or actually close as scheduled? Apparently, GM can change its mind after making announcements and after the Obama admin and his cars czar got involved in the game.

So how is it that Ryan was trying to deceive anyone, as such omission really wasn't all that relevant to the point he was making about Obama, was it? If you think it was, then please explain in face of the facts.

@Bren -

Obama's statement in October of 2008:

"This news is also a reminder that Washington needs to finally live up to its promise to help our automakers compete in our global economy. 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."

Remember, the GM announcement to close the plant occurred in June of 2008, so this statement was made after that announcement.

Clearly, the word 'like,' used in such context, meant 'such as,' otherwise why mention creating good paying jobs in Wisconsin, unless Obama was planning to keep Janesville closed and build a new plant in Wisconsin, which would just be plain STUPID and why would anyone need to "retool" a brand new plant?

I don't know about you, but to Hoffa, it sure sounds like Obama was pitching to the Janesville and similarly situated autoworkers to vote for him in the HOPE that Obama's victory might CHANGE their situation.

Honestly, how could you conclude otherwise? Please explain.

The deceitful and dishonest one here is clearly Obama and the left for wrongly accusing Ryan of lying!

Prove me wrong Bren, or admit that you were WRONG!!!

@Randy1949 -

Obama, of course, denies having any influence and GM / Chrysler aren't talking.

However, the FACT remains that plants in Bedford, Toledo, Massena, Bloomington, etc. were either already closed or scheduled for closing, but then miraculously remained open after Obama's bailout went through. Funny how that worked out.

And if Obama didn't have any influence, then why the need to use a cars czar? Bush wasn't going to use one under his proposed bailout plan that mirrored how Carter successful saved Chrysler back in '79. So why was this czar even necessary under Obama's bailout if GM and Chrysler were just going to be able to do whatever they wanted anyway? If that's the case, then shouldn't you and other libs be pissed at Obama for wasting money on paying that cars czar to essential do nothing?

Coincidence - perhaps. Suspicious - highly! Think for yourself, as Hoffa always says. There's really only one logical conclusion considering all the facts involved, though.

"You might want to quote him so we can all see what he actually said."

Luke already did that in the original thread on this comment board, but Hoffa will re-post below.

What Randy1949 did not do was answer Hoffa's question and explain why the omission matters in face of all the facts.

Obama's statement in October of 2008:

"This news is also a reminder that Washington needs to finally live up to its promise to help our automakers compete in our global economy. 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."

Remember, the GM announcement to close the plant occurred in June of 2008, so this statement was made after that announcement.

Clearly, the word 'like,' used in such context, meant 'such as,' otherwise why mention creating good paying jobs in Wisconsin, unless Obama was planning to keep Janesville closed and build a new plant in Wisconsin, which would just be plain STUPID and why would anyone need to "retool" a brand new plant?

I don't know about you, but to Hoffa, it sure sounds like Obama was pitching to the Janesville and similarly situated autoworkers to vote for him in the HOPE that Obama's victory might CHANGE their situation.

Honestly, how could you conclude otherwise? Please explain.

The deceitful and dishonest one here is clearly Obama and the left for wrongly accusing Ryan of lying!

Prove me wrong Randy!

I don't see any promises in that statement. And we all know how successful most of President Obama's initiatives have been. So, retool the plant, make fuel efficient cars. Not very popular with your crowd.

@Randy1949 -

The statement only expressly contained the word "promise," but you don't see wherein a promise was made???

You're kidding, right?

BTW - You still didn't explain how the omission was relevant in the face of all the facts.

Washington's promise, not the President's. And I sure don't see him promising to re-open the Janesville plant or keep it open in the first place.. He says he'll lead an effort to retool US factories to make fuel efficient cars.. Maybe you could explain to me how he was supposed to do that with the GOP blocking everything in Congress that he proposed?

I'll do you one better -- you explain to me why the decision was made to close the plant in the first place?

@Randy1949 -

1) Did Obama not adopt Washington's promise as being his own in that statement, wherein he said "As president I will lead..." basically an effort to fulfill that promise? Come on - you're a smart guy. I shouldn't have to point out the obvious.

2) "He says he'll lead an effort to retool US factories to make fuel efficient cars."

And the speech specifically mentions Janesville and good paying jobs in Wisconsin!!! Again, clearly, the word 'like,' used in such context, meant 'such as,' otherwise why mention creating good paying jobs in Wisconsin, unless Obama was planning to keep Janesville closed and build a new plant in Wisconsin, which would just be plain STUPID and why would anyone need to "retool" a brand new plant?

3) The GOP wasn't blocking anything then - Obama got to do the bailout the way he wanted to do it, remember? Deal with the UAW, Italians, and Canadians, cars czar, over $25B in taxpayer dollars lost. Ryan and the GOP supported the Bush/Carter bailout and opposed the crooked Obama bailout but were outvoted by the Dems. You're trying to re-write history here, which shows just how desperate you are to spin this to make Obama look good, despite the facts being against your erroneous conclusion. Let's go with what really happened instead of Randy's revisionist histrionics!

4) I'll answer your question just as soon as you tell us why the omission changes anything in light of the facts or you admit that you were WRONG.

@Rees Roberts -- Actually I do and have been doing it. Over the course of the summer I've single-handedly torn down and reshingled 2000 square feet of a 3000 square foot roof. I check the internet during water breaks and in the evenings.

My mistake is falling for Hoffa's verbal manipulations. You can't have a fruitful discussion with people who use their own definitions and insist on putting words in your mouth.

Randy

I just counted Alias Hoffa's comments just in this thread. If you just count them to the end of last night there were a total thread of 75 comments. Hoffa had 26 of them. That, all by itself is over a third, not counting the other threads he may have been involved with. That is why I expressed the comment last night that people need to get a life.

When people engage in this type of banter I would suggest not playing in that type of sandbox simply because there really appears to be more at stake just taking the opposing point of view that others bring to the table. I suggest that people put balance back into their participation. We might even get better and more informative threads in the process.

By the way Randy, I commend your roof work. That is very hard physical labor.

@Randy1949 -

Please point out Hoffa's alleged "verbal manipulations" or where Hoffa "insist[ed] on putting words in your mouth."

You're the one who's rewriting history by claiming that the GOP obstructed Obama from doing the bailouts the way he insisted upon doing them!

Thanks!

Thanks!

@Rees Roberts -- You're telling me, dude. Two-thirds done, and the old body is feeling it.

I should know better than to get into a whizzing contest with Hoffa, but I like him and enjoy sparring for the most part. Plus, spin needs to be countered.

And Hoffa, you just want me to admit I'm 'wrong' and we'll be done. Not happening. We're arguing over semantics and their interpretation, which neither side completely owns.

@Rees -

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but they are not entitled to their own facts or to rewrite history to defend their opinion.

Honestly, at least Lyle admits that the facts are the facts and are irrefutable in this case, but because of his preconceived bias and the FACT that the facts back the position that Ryan is telling the truth, he writes it off as "meaningless rhetoric," thereby admitting that his bias won't permit him to openly admit to the ultimate factual conclusion - that Ryan told the truth and Obama and the left accusing Ryan of lying were in fact the LIARS!

I've asked Randy to show why an omission from Ryan's speech is relevant in face of the facts - crickets. Instead he comes back with made up crap about how the GOP obstructed Obama from doing the bailouts the way he insisted upon doing them!

Rewriting history to support your position shows just how low and pathetic that Obama and his supporters have become in order to be able to still support him. Even some of the liberals have jumped the Obama train-wreck, such a Michael Moore, Newsweek magazine, etc.

If you guys are honestly that gullible, then Hoffa would like to sell you the Brooklyn Bridge - he'll give you a really good price on it ;-)

You want me to explain how the omission of the date of the decision to close the plant is germane? Paul Ryan told the 'truth' from a certain point of view, leaving people to draw their own conclusions. Was he 'lying'? No. He was just not telling the whole truth.

The decision to close the plant happened in 2008, as the result of economic forces that had been building for a long time. President Obama owns very little of that. Yes, i suppose he could have decreed that the plant be opened again, but that argument really grasps at straws. I thought you were against the government takeover of the auto business?

@Randy1949 -

There you go trying to shift the subject about government takeover of a private business. This isn't about ideologies - it's about Ryan's speech and Obama's actions. Let's stick to the issue instead of shifting the subject, shall we?

I don't see how the omission of the June closure announcement from Ryan's speech was germane given that Obama doubled down in the October statement, as Obama new about the closure at that time and still gave the statement.

Given the context of that statement, which you haven't disputed, let's insert the words 'such as' for 'like,' as that's how Obama was using the word 'like' in that statement:

"As president, I will lead an effort to retool plants [such as] 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."

And yet, that's not a direct or implied promise???

Funny how Obama did cause the firing of then GM CEO Rick Wagoner, as supported by the link provided by John Wilson, despite Obama denying having any influence as to how the companies restructured themselves in the bailout. And again, why was the cars czar needed again if Obama didn't have any influence over decision making? Not to mention once again that several plants that were either already closed or slated for closure were miraculously retooled and open after the bailout went through. And yet, not a single high-paying auto job was created in Wisconsin thanks to Obama's bailout, despite him specifically mentioning Wisconsin in that statement.

Yeah, you're right - Obama definitely wasn't deceitful to the Janesville autoworkers. All that talk about providing assistance to keep the plant open for a hundred more years, retooling, good paying jobs in the state, the direct attention that Obama showered upon Janesville. Those autoworkers should have just wrote it off as "meaningless rhetoric," right?

Sorry, Hoffa, if you can't see how Ryan's omission spins the implications, i can't help you.

After that, you're asking me to address your arguments with counter-arguments that just lead to accusations of changing the subject, and frankly i have more important things to do today than engage in the whizzing contest I mentioned to Rees. Randy's done playing for the day.

Randy:

Good for you. Notice Hoffa, whoever he is, didn't comment on my observations how much he takes during the day sputtering. This is my last comment in this thread too. Way too nice outside not to enjoy it.

Cheers

@Randy1949 -

I'd agree with you about the importance of the June closure announcement had it not been 1) for the October statement by Obama, as you've provided no logical analysis negating the veracity of that statement; 2) the influence that Obama actually did exert over the companies during the bailout, as supported by all the facts, despite Obama's denial of such; and 3) for the fact that GM could in fact change its mind about plant closures, as was demonstrated on multiple occasions throughout the bailout process.

Even John Wilson's fact check supports the conclusion that Obama LIED about not having any influence over GM and Chrysler during the bailout. And Hoffa raised a valid analysis about the need for the cars czar if no influence existed.

If you can't support your contentions with a logical analysis, then one must wonder if you really believe in such a contention yourself!

@John Wilson -

Hoffa stands corrected on the Isuzu contract issue in regards to your linked to fact check.

"Obama could not have promised to keep the plant open because it's a privately owned plant."

And your so-called fact-check contradicts itself wherein it also states:

"The U.S. Treasury -- which is part of the Obama administration -- has owned a sizable stake in GM since 2009, so, presumably, if the president and Treasury had wanted to take a more activist role to reopen Janesville, it could have. After all, the administration called for and got the firing of then-CEO Rick Wagoner."

So let me get this straight - Obama couldn't tell a privately owned company to save a plant, but he could tell them to fire and replace their CEO????

How is this not a most serious contradiction in logic????

Either Obama had influence to do things or he did not! And if he didn't, then why the need for the cars czar and his supporting staff? Why did we the people need to pay their salaries if they had no power to do anything? If Obama had no power, then why didn't he just follow Carter's successful model of bailing out Chrysler back in '79 under Iaccoca with a straight up interest bearing loan with a defined repayment scheduled, whereby the taxpayers would have recovered 100% of their investment plus a little interest, just as Bush was setting up the bailout to be?

Instead we needed the Obama hanky panky deal with the UAW, Fiat, and Canadians - WHY???

And why aren't you upset over that the fact that over $25B taxpayer dollars were lost in the way Obama insisted upon structuring the bailout, while Fiat, the UAW, and private investors are allowed to now profit at the people's expense?

I thought liberals hated giving taxpayer money to select special interests / corporatists?

Obama screwed you out of tax dollars so others could profit and it's the GOP that wants to screw people?

You're spinning more than records were in a '70's roller-disco!

JMB, did the government pick the dealerships? Remember, this wasn't a government takeover. GM is still donating 2:1 to Republican representatives. The bailout is estimated to have saved about 1 million direct and indirect jobs. Standing by and letting it crash was not an option, unless you care nothing at all about your fellow Americans.

@Bren -

If Obama didn't have influence over the industry in the bailout, then why did GM fire and replace then CEO Rick Wagoner? John Wilson has provided a link indicating that Obama directly forced such action. Also, why was there a need for a cars czar and his supporting staff if Obama had no influence?

If Obama had no power, then why didn't he just follow Carter's successful model of bailing out Chrysler back in '79 under Iaccoca with a straight up interest bearing loan with a defined repayment scheduled, whereby the taxpayers would have recovered 100% of their investment plus a little interest? Bush wasn't just going to let the industry die, as you suggest - he was going to save it using the successful Carter model - a plan that Ryan voted in favor of.

Instead we needed the Obama hanky panky deal with the UAW, Fiat, and Canadians - WHY???

And why aren't you upset over that the fact that over $25B taxpayer dollars were lost in the way Obama insisted upon structuring the bailout, while Fiat, the UAW, and private investors are allowed to now profit at the people's expense?

I thought liberals hated giving taxpayer money to select special interests / corporatists?

Why couldn't the industry have been saved without ripping off taxpayers? Carter proved that it can be done.

You always duck the hard questions and I have no doubt that you will once again.