The Odd Lies of Paul Ryan

[W.D.Clinger]

I ran my first marathon in a little less than three hours.

Kaosium,
I was a long distance runner back when. I ran a few marathons and I actually did three hours or just about. You know if you can do a three hour marathon, believe me. Just as you know if you can do 2 1/2.

Quoted for truth.

A sub-3 hour marathon makes one an elite athlete. It's kind of like claiming you played in the NBA when you only played high school varsity, or that one has a PhD when they really only had a BA. Does it matter for the VP of the USA? I guess we're going to find out.

No, a sub-three-hour marathon makes you a very good athlete, as I was, but hardly elite. In 2012, the Olympic A-standard qualifying time for US athletes was 2:19, and that gives you a pretty good idea of how fast you have to run to be considered an elite marathoner nowadays.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but don't most marathon runners remember EXACTLY their times in each race, even at twenty years remove? That quote would send up a red flag for me.

Absolutely. Until the onset of dementia, everyone who has run a marathon remembers his or her best time.

If what is being reported is true (that Paul Ryan claimed to have run a sub-three-hour marathon when his best time is on the wrong side of four hours), then Paul Ryan is a liar.

 

[Kaosium]

You really should submit this to So You Think You Can Dance for the Season 9 tryouts. You are avoiding the question. Why won't you answer it? Did he or did he not say, rather specifically, that he's not the kind of guy who votes for something and then writes letters to try to get money for the home district? Yes or No.

What you and others are doing is assuming is what he said is what you (or they) think he meant. That's the problem.

Answer that and then change over to whether or not his district or the locals on whose behalf he appealed actually gained anything. Hint: They did. He wrote letters of recommendation/support and they got part of the bailout money - those two companies that we know of got $21,000,000. Certainly small potatoes in the world of Bridges to Nowhere and Trent Lott pork barreling, but no exactly Tea Party Chump Change, either.

The spending portion of the stimulus package was about 500 billion (the other 300 or so billion was tax cuts) thus that would come to 1.2 billion or or so per district if split equally, and it sounds like his district got less than 2% of what might have been expected had it been doled out equally.

And, again, this is the guy who said he didn't write those sorts of letters, but quite obviously wrote them and didn't exactly rush forward with the information that he had sidled up to the trough with the other little piggies. At east Ron Paul is straightforward about his stuff and earmarks bills blatantly. Ryan quietly "played the game" but pretends his poop doesn't smell.

This strikes me as obscenely pedantic.

And, by the way, there is no requirement that you get your applications forwarded by a Congressman or Senator. This isn't an appointment to Annapolis or West Point. You can submit your applications and back them up. Cronyism is still cronyism, whether it's under the guise of our new Tea Party superheroes or old warhorses like Lott, Long, Byrd, et al

The Energy whatever of WI submits the application, he forwards it along with the cover letter. I imagine he's familiar with their work being as he's their congressman and the Energy Dept is the one that decides. That's hell and gone from 'sidling up to the troth like the other piggies.'

 

[Kaosium]

To sway uninformed voters.

ETA: Also I hope you recognize the fallacy of your reasoning. Arguing that he had no reason to lie (that you can discern, anyway) isn't the same thing as a defense against the very solid arguments made that he did in fact tell a pack of lies.

I've not yet seen a solid argument that he 'told a pack of lies.' I've simply seen accusations without support, or that require assumptions about what he meant. My point was that in laying out his philosophy in a convention speech it would be pointless to 'lie' about that, and even if he did get a fact wrong it's much more likely it was a mistake (or misunderstanding) than a 'lie' because he knows there's 'fact checkers' out there. Do you see what I mean?

 

[Kaosium]

I am just a poor boy
Son of Janesville, son of man
And I’ve squandered all my honor
Just help our zombie win it, such are VP’s roles.

I lie and jest
‘Cause I do just what the rich guys want
To hell with all the rest
Once I had some real ideas
But now all I do is lie.

Lie lie lie,
Lie-la lie lie, lie-la lie
Lie lie lie,
Lie-la lie lie, lie-la lie, la-la-lie lie lie

Tried to loan Mitt my charisma.
So forget my budget plan.
Now I parrot Party Platform
And repeat the stories old
Of how Obamacare will kill us
How he closed my hometown plant
I don’t care about fact checkers
When I’m on a lying rant.

Lie lie lie,
Lie-la lie lie, lie-la lie
Lie lie lie,
Lie-la lie lie, lie-la lie, la-la-lie lie lie

(Apologies to Paul Simon and "The Boxer")​

​

Tricky, do you think it would be a positive development for this country if all that happened the next two months were negative campaign commercials accusing each side of 'lying' instead of actually having a debate to try to fix things?

 

[Kaosium]

S&P's announcement said in part, "The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America's governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed. The statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy … [This] weakens the government's ability to manage public finances …" It seems to me that both the game of chicken and the longer term fiscal issues were partially to blame for the downgrade. I found this quote at a blog at The Economist. Its author wrote, "As S&P's announcement makes clear, the inadequacy of the deal was only one motivation. As important (to me, even more important) was the the reckless and divisive battle that preceded it"

Michael Kinsley wrote about the debt ceiling debate, "It’s an odd way to show fiscal discipline. It’s as if you went to the bank where you are behind in your mortgage payments and said, 'Look, I’m sorry, but I’ve just been borrowing too much and wasting it on stupid, needless purchases. So as of now, I’m going to stop paying what I owe. Aren’t I wonderful for getting my appetites under control at last?'"

Did you suppose anyone ever actually thought the US was going to default? Simply raising the debt limit without fixing the budgetary problems that S&P also detailed will not fix the problem, it will make it worse.

 

[Frank Newgent]

Seems like as long as the dollar is the reserve currency the US has been getting away with it.

Until...

 

[Tricky]

Tricky, do you think it would be a positive development for this country if all that happened the next two months were negative campaign commercials accusing each side of 'lying' instead of actually having a debate to try to fix things?

I dunno. Why don't you ask that once the Romney campaign actually makes a straightforward statement about their policy. When they say what programs they'd cut, for example.

Sure, it would be nice if there were a campaign about the issues, but based on Romney's smear campaigns all throughout the primaries and now the general election, it is pretty clear that is not going to happen.

Obama is going to attack and not going to sit back and let himself be Swiftboated, and that's just the way it is. It is somewhat disingenious for Republicans to be claiming to want a civil campaign, when they have been the master of dirty tricks for so many years. Poor little thin-skinned bullies.

 

[Robrob]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but don't most marathon runners remember EXACTLY their times in each race, even at twenty years remove? That quote would send up a red flag for me.

For most normal people, yes.

 

[Scott Sommers]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but don't most marathon runners remember EXACTLY their times in each race, even at twenty years remove? That quote would send up a red flag for me.

I have run a marathon. And yes, almost 25 years later, I still know my exact finishing time. I posted about this on my Facebook and a friend who also runs said this,

...running the marathon is a challenge and finishing in any time a feat - so much so that you do remember the time for each one. I certainly do, after several. And they give you your time after you finish, on a certificate - so getting it that wrong is just plain lying. The code among real runners is never to embellish your times; politicians doing it just once for a stunt, who knows?

There is no way Ryan does not know this - not just the time, but that there's a record of it somewhere. How he would not understand that someone would check this is not at all clear to me. Maybe he was so nervous that he couldn't keep things straight. I can understand that some people have serious nervous conditions that make it hard to keep facts straight or relate them when asked in high pressure situations. But then such a person shouldn't be the VP of the USA, either.

 

[elbe]

Personally I think he was just bragging. If a politician told me they caught a fish "this big" I'd pretty much assume they were embellishing. I'm not sure it's enough for me to really draw any assumptions about his honesty.

The rest of his character, though...

 

[Frank Newgent]

Maybe he was channelling Bob Uecker?

 

[Robrob]

I have run a marathon. And yes, almost 25 years later, I still know my exact finishing time. I posted about this on my Facebook and a friend who also runs said this,

There is no way Ryan does not know this - not just the time, but that there's a record of it somewhere. How he would not understand that someone would check this is not at all clear to me. Maybe he was so nervous that he couldn't keep things straight. I can understand that some people have serious nervous conditions that make it hard to keep facts straight or relate them when asked in high pressure situations. But then such a person shouldn't be the VP of the USA, either.

I can understand he may have been nervous or made a mistake. What I can't understand was the hesitancy of Ryan and his apologists to simply man up and admit it. They had to know the longer they drug it out, the more bad press they'd receive.

 

[elbe]

I can understand he may have been nervous or made a mistake. What I can't understand was the hesitancy of Ryan and his apologists to simply man up and admit it. They had to know the longer they drug it out, the more bad press they'd receive.

While I couldn't speak for them I could imagine they might have felt that hoping it would just go away was better than admitting fault. Being wrong about something may be considered a weakness in politics.

 

[Ausmerican]

I though it was the difference of an hour or so? If that's correct are you a LIAR p) for getting it wrong?.

Incorrect. Anything over an hour is called hours not hour. As in "one and a quarter hours". Considering the falsities you are justifying for Ryan this is practically set in stone gospel truth.

As for the time difference Ryan comes from a family that runs. He runs, his brother runs. Sub three hours is the difference between marathon running and marathon racing. You would remember that even if you hurt your back and never ran another. Much like if you were picked for a major league team and then blew out from injury.

 

[Kaosium]

I dunno. Why don't you ask that once the Romney campaign actually makes a straightforward statement about their policy. When they say what programs they'd cut, for example.

What do you suppose happens when the GOP details what programs would be cut? Actually what did happen when Ryan proposed a budget?

Sure, it would be nice if there were a campaign about the issues, but based on Romney's smear campaigns all throughout the primaries and now the general election, it is pretty clear that is not going to happen.

I wasn't (really) watching the primaries--certainly not the campaign commercials! What 'smear campaigns' distressed you? This thread you're participating in is a smear, what you posted is smear tactics, criticizing an opponent's position is not. Neither is (unless done disingenuously) attacking their record, though that's often easy to confuse people on as the system is complex and often the proper context is required.

Obama is going to attack and not going to sit back and let himself be Swiftboated, and that's just the way it is.

Tricky, this thread and the media campaign behind it is Swiftboat tactics! You're doing it! You even made up (or re-posted) a filk!

Correct me if I'm wrong but Kerry was running on (highlighting at least) his war experience and record and the 'Swiftboat Veterans for Truth' or whatever they were called came out combing through everything he'd said about it and his experience there and either employed pedantry, misrepresentations or just plain not taking context into account, especially regarding his medals? (look into how Bo Gritz got all of his sometime ) It was (in part) a character assassination and an attempt to turn a positive into a negative?

It is somewhat disingenious for Republicans to be claiming to want a civil campaign, when they have been the master of dirty tricks for so many years. Poor little thin-skinned bullies.

What does that have to do with what you're doing?

 

[Kaosium]

Incorrect. Anything over an hour is called hours not hour. As in "one and a quarter hours". Considering the falsities you are justifying for Ryan this is practically set in stone gospel truth.

I find that ridiculous semantics, and I was just kidding.

I allow that the marathon time is a 'falsity.' (cool word incidentally!)

However I'm just guessing that word is supposed to be plural. What other 'falsity' did you find in his speech, and do you recognize that it's dishonest to pretend that a false statement is inherently a lie?

As for the time difference Ryan comes from a family that runs. He runs, his brother runs. Sub three hours is the difference between marathon running and marathon racing. You would remember that even if you hurt your back and never ran another. Much like if you were picked for a major league team and then blew out from injury.

You are assuming facts not in evidence, and indeed in the context of the 'discovery' also other things that weren't even assumed by the person who wrote the article.

 

[Robrob]

I allow that the marathon time is a 'falsity.' (cool word incidentally!)

So why have you spent so many posts trying to pretend it wasn't?

 

[Kaosium]

I can understand he may have been nervous or made a mistake. What I can't understand was the hesitancy of Ryan and his apologists to simply man up and admit it. They had to know the longer they drug it out, the more bad press they'd receive.

Actually I thought the article said he'd already done that, or something else was posted indicating he'd immediately corrected it, something about what his brother had said?

I could care less personally, what I'm (mainly) interested in here is discussing the other 'lies' that have been claimed regarding him.

Do you know what? I think the WI GOP ought to run a statewide commercial showing Obama giving that speech and in the background a walkthrough of the empty and decaying plant and see just who would buy that wasn't something of a campaign promise to do something about it. It would be even better if they could catch someone connected to his campaign giving some sort of pathetic semantic justification of how he didn't exactly make any 'promises.'

 

[Kaosium]

So why have you spent so many posts trying to pretend it wasn't?

do you recognize that it's dishonest to pretend that a false statement is inherently a lie?

That's why.

 

[elbe]

Are you suggesting that Ryan just forgot how he helped block the president's deficit plan when he complained about how the president didn't do anything about it? If so, I think Ryan has bigger issues.

If our choices are lying for political gain or too incompetent to factcheck his speech, I don't find him to be a very good person to support.

Like I said, all the evidence suggests lying by omission. To believe he was just "mistaken" is, I believe, a poor conclusion. But then to automatically distrust anyone who's facts differ from your opinion? That's a pretty clear sign of partisan blinders.