Conquer Club

Washington - Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan inaccurately said Thursday that President Barack Obama "broke his promise" by failing to keep a General Motors plant open that closed in 2008 - before the Democrat took office.

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2012 ... z256vbFhFc

Bones2484 wrote:

Night Strike wrote:Fallen for the liberal lies hook, line, and sinker. The liberals had absolutely no attack on his speech, so all their headlines had to make up that he lied.

Fall for the conservatives lies hook, line, and sinker. The conservatives will flat out believe anything one of their own tells them, so all the comments Ryan made must be true.

rdsrds2120 wrote:I can see how some of them can be distorted/mixed up to not be "lies", but just misdirecting and misleading. However, the most clear-cut one seems to be this one:

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2012 ... /208160480

Washington - Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan inaccurately said Thursday that President Barack Obama "broke his promise" by failing to keep a General Motors plant open that closed in 2008 - before the Democrat took office.

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2012 ... z256vbFhFc

-rd

Night Strike wrote:And again, the "fact-checkers" were wrong. Candidate Obama went to the town and stated that under his policies, he would make sure GM wouldn't go bankrupt and would keep the plant open. In went idle in December 2008, but it was not formally closed until 2009, which means Obama could have kept his promise by making GM keep that plant open. This was also discussed in the article I posted.

Symmetry wrote:

Night Strike wrote:And again, the "fact-checkers" were wrong. Candidate Obama went to the town and stated that under his policies, he would make sure GM wouldn't go bankrupt and would keep the plant open. In went idle in December 2008, but it was not formally closed until 2009, which means Obama could have kept his promise by making GM keep that plant open. This was also discussed in the article I posted.

Hmm- yet another dodge for Ryan. It's odd that you can't discuss his lies without attacking Obama.

Let's face it- you'd defend Ryan to the hilt as long as he was anti-Obama. Lies or truth are pretty much irrelevant, you just don't like Obama,

Night Strike wrote:making GM keep that plant open.

thegreekdog wrote:.

I guess my question is, why do you care that Paul Ryan lied by ommission when you do not seem to care that the president lies period?

Since the Romney campaign wants to run against President Obama’s cuts to Medicare, it’s something of a problem for them that Paul Ryan’s budget includes those very same cuts to Medicare. And so they’ve come up with a somewhat confused and confusing argument to distinguish the two plans.

Obama’s cuts to Medicare are different because Ryan “keeps that money for Medicare to extend its solvency” while Obama uses it “to pay for a new risky program of his own that we call Obamacare.”


Ryan’s budget keeps Obama’s Medicare cuts. (Joshua Roberts — Bloomberg)

This is basically a misunderstanding of how budgeting works. Or, at the least, it’s predicated on the listener misunderstanding how budgeting works.

What they’re doing is switching between two questions very quickly. The first question is: “How much money are you cutting from Medicare?” The second question is: “How much overall deficit reduction is contained in your plan?” And the second question isn’t getting answered.

Here’s what everyone agrees on: Ryan and Obama include the same cuts to the Medicare program itself. So if you’re an insurance company participating in the Medicare Advantage program, you’re getting the same cut no matter who wins the election. So the answer to the first question is, “the same amount as the Obama administration.”

What Romney/Ryan are saying is that they then take the money saved from their cuts to Medicare and put it toward deficit reduction while Obama takes that money and spends it on health care for poor people. The argument here is that by using the money to cut the deficit, Romney/Ryan make future cuts to Medicare less likely.

But Romney/Ryan also add a trillion dollars to the defense budget. And they have trillions of dollars in tax cuts they haven’t explained how they’re going to pay for. So those decisions make future cuts to Medicare more likely. Meanwhile, Obama cuts defense spending by hundreds of billions of dollars, raises about $1.5 trillion in new taxes, and puts all that money into deficit reduction. So that makes future Medicare cuts less likely.

So if the argument is that Romney/Ryan protect Medicare by putting the $770 billion in cuts towards deficit reduction, Obama protects Medicare by twice as much by putting the $1.5 trillion in new tax revenues towards deficit reduction. So far as the deficit is concerned, there’s no difference between a dollar from Medicare and a dollar from taxes.

Which just leaves us where we began: Romney/Ryan want to do more of their deficit reduction by cutting social services while Obama wants to do more of his deficit reduction through raising taxes. Deciding whose plan makes more sense requires making judgments about whether Romney/Ryan will ultimately pay for their tax cuts. But deciding who is cutting Medicare by $700 billion just requires looking at who is cutting Medicare by $700 billion. And at the moment, that’s both Obama and the Republican budget.

The Romney/Ryan campaign is aware of the difficulties in their argument, and so they’ve introduced a new wrinkle. They told Avik Roy, who also serves as a health adviser to the campaign, that “A Romney-Ryan Administration will restore the funding to Medicare.” If that’s true, then their budget math just got completely impossible, as I’ll explain in a coming post.

thegreekdog wrote:This is confusing to me.

Obama: I love people that don't have health insurance. I would never cut entitlements. The Republicans would though because they are evil fatcats (no Player thread).

Ryan: I hate people that don't have health insurance. I would always cut entitlements. You already know and believe these things about me. And guess what... that guy Obama? He also cut your entitlements. (Player thread).

I guess my question is, why do you care that Paul Ryan lied by ommission when you do not seem to care that the president lies period?

Yesterday, Paul Ryan got in a little trouble for telling Hugh Hewitt in a radio interview that he had run a marathon in just under three hours. As I wrote, runners were skeptical, and eventually his claim was revealed to be untrue: he actually ran a marathon in just over four hours. Last night, Ryan gave The New Yorker a statement:

“The race was more than 20 years ago, but my brother Tobin—who ran Boston last year—reminds me that he is the owner of the fastest marathon in the family and has never himself ran a sub-three. If I were to do any rounding, it would certainly be to four hours, not three. He gave me a good ribbing over this at dinner tonight.”

Does the misstatement—or lie, or fib—matter? As James Fallows pointed out on The Atlantic, in one way it obviously doesn’t. It has no bearing at all on the republic how fast Paul Ryan ran. Ryan could also surely beat any of the other major candidates, or the Supreme Court justices, in a foot race. But in another way it is important: Is the potential Vice President the sort of person who lies congenitally? In that sense it matters.

fadedpsychosis wrote:yeah, the least he could do is lie about a blowjob... come on, a marathon is hardly worthy of a political lie

thegreekdog wrote:This is confusing to me.

Obama: I love people that don't have health insurance. I would never cut entitlements. The Republicans would though because they are evil fatcats (no Player thread).

thegreekdog wrote:Ryan: I hate people that don't have health insurance. I would always cut entitlements. You already know and believe these things about me. And guess what... that guy Obama? He also cut your entitlements. (Player thread).

Phatscotty wrote:

Night Strike wrote:Fallen for the liberal lies hook, line, and sinker. The liberals had absolutely no attack on his speech, so all their headlines had to make up that he lied.

yup. We are already expecting apologies from those who have said the Vice Prez candidate was lying, but they were going to call him a liar no matter who the VP pick was and no matter what the VP cand. says. I guess we throw Player on the list of coming apologies for actually being the liars themselves. When I heard the evidence that Ryan was telling the truth, I already knew there would be a thread here on this, except I thought it would be made by Phat Bottom. Player.....yeah she is in good company too

Night Strike wrote:

GreecePwns wrote:Some of these aren't even lies by omission, they're simply lies (i.e. the "Obama killed the Budget Commission plan" c'mon man, Ryan was on the commission and personally voted his own commission's recommendations)

Ryan voted against it because they did not adopt his amendment for reforming Medicare, so he felt the plan was incomplete.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

Night Strike wrote:Fallen for the liberal lies hook, line, and sinker. The liberals had absolutely no attack on his speech, so all their headlines had to make up that he lied.

yup. We are already expecting apologies from those who have said the Vice Prez candidate was lying, but they were going to call him a liar no matter who the VP pick was and no matter what the VP cand. says. I guess we throw Player on the list of coming apologies for actually being the liars themselves. When I heard the evidence that Ryan was telling the truth, I already knew there would be a thread here on this, except I thought it would be made by Phat Bottom. Player.....yeah she is in good company too

How about you actually LISTEN TO the speech before you start claiming I am lying!

As noted above, even FOX.. hardly any liberal friend, blasted him for his speech.

But go ahead and present your evidence that Ryan was not lying. It should be interesting.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

GreecePwns wrote:Some of these aren't even lies by omission, they're simply lies (i.e. the "Obama killed the Budget Commission plan" c'mon man, Ryan was on the commission and personally voted his own commission's recommendations)

Ryan voted against it because they did not adopt his amendment for reforming Medicare, so he felt the plan was incomplete.

Most of us learn in elementary school that saying "play my way or I take the ball home" are words of a bully, not a leader.

And for him to blame Obama for his own failure is pretty low, by any standard.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:This is confusing to me.

Obama: I love people that don't have health insurance. I would never cut entitlements. The Republicans would though because they are evil fatcats (no Player thread).

Find the quote.
Obama is no political saint, but there is a fundamental difference betwen Obama's words (and even Romney's, by-the-way) and Ryans. There is a difference between a general "you are eliminating benefits, but giving tax breaks to the wealthy ... I won't be eliminating benefits (even if he will cut them) and Ryan declaring "Obama is cutting 700 million from Medicare" and neglecting to point out that he is advocating the same dollar cuts AND fundamental changes to Medicare that will change it to a need-based program that is in no way shape or form gauranteed to cover even minimal care for those who are covered.

ALSO, I only quoted one piece of misinformation.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:This is confusing to me.

Obama: I love people that don't have health insurance. I would never cut entitlements. The Republicans would though because they are evil fatcats (no Player thread).

Find the quote.
Obama is no political saint, but there is a fundamental difference betwen Obama's words (and even Romney's, by-the-way) and Ryans. There is a difference between a general "you are eliminating benefits, but giving tax breaks to the wealthy ... I won't be eliminating benefits (even if he will cut them) and Ryan declaring "Obama is cutting 700 million from Medicare" and neglecting to point out that he is advocating the same dollar cuts AND fundamental changes to Medicare that will change it to a need-based program that is in no way shape or form gauranteed to cover even minimal care for those who are covered.

ALSO, I only quoted one piece of misinformation. There was

thegreekdog wrote:Ryan: I hate people that don't have health insurance. I would always cut entitlements. You already know and believe these things about me. And guess what... that guy Obama? He also cut your entitlements. (Player thread).

I guess my question is, why do you care that Paul Ryan lied by ommission when you do not seem to care that the president lies period?

Night Strike wrote:Ryan's plan has to "cut" Medicare because it was already cut in previous legislation. When they write legislation, they have to write it assuming that no other law already on the books will be changing except by changes in the new legislation. He could have refunded those cuts back into his plan, but that would have caused a fight (distraction) over repealing Obamacare as part of his budget proposal. He would definitely like to cut Obamacare, but when preparing budgetary plans, he is forced to assume that it stays as law (unless his budget plan specifically repealed it). Those cuts are already the established law of the land, so they have to be assumed as the starting point for any new spending.

Evil Semp wrote:If Romney succeeds in repealing Obamacare where will the money come from to fund Ryan's program?

Night Strike wrote:

Evil Semp wrote:If Romney succeeds in repealing Obamacare where will the money come from to fund Ryan's program?

The plan will have to be adjusted, just like every other plan has to be adjusted when the law changes. Although, they might deficit fund the current promises (age 55 and up) while at the same time instituting long-term solutions that will ultimately keep the program alive.

Symmetry wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

Evil Semp wrote:If Romney succeeds in repealing Obamacare where will the money come from to fund Ryan's program?

The plan will have to be adjusted, just like every other plan has to be adjusted when the law changes. Although, they might deficit fund the current promises (age 55 and up) while at the same time instituting long-term solutions that will ultimately keep the program alive.

Erm, I don't undestand. He's saying the law will be repealed. not adjusted. Was Romney lying? Is he just going to improve Obamacare? Or is he going to repeal it?

Woodruff wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

Evil Semp wrote:If Romney succeeds in repealing Obamacare where will the money come from to fund Ryan's program?

The plan will have to be adjusted, just like every other plan has to be adjusted when the law changes. Although, they might deficit fund the current promises (age 55 and up) while at the same time instituting long-term solutions that will ultimately keep the program alive.

Erm, I don't undestand. He's saying the law will be repealed. not adjusted. Was Romney lying? Is he just going to improve Obamacare? Or is he going to repeal it?

I think Night Strike is saying that ObamaCare will be repealed, but that RYAN'S PLAN will have to be adjusted because of that repealing of ObamaCare.