Chris Matthews and MSNBC Now Claim the Word 'Chicago' Is Racist

[Busybody]

 

[koalabear]

one would think it meant death instead.

 

[Busybody]

 

[jeninflorida]

not sure which one is more insane, Chris or Larry aka the socialist wing-nut.


the best quote from Lawrence was how he was talking about his viewers and how they were more or less ignorant and that was to his advantage

 

[Busybody]

L O'Donnel was once SHITTING all over Mormons

He was asked if he would say the same about MUSLIMS

He said NO

HE DIDNT WANNA BE KILLED



Nothing more needs to be said

 

[phrodeau]

L O'Donnel was once SHITTING all over Mormons

He was asked if he would say the same about MUSLIMS

He said NO

HE DIDNT WANNA BE KILLED



Nothing more needs to be said

Yet you find lots more to say.

 

[koalabear]

Yet you find lots more to say.

You tell him yellow neck.

 

[CandiCame]

He had it comin
He had it comin
He only himself to blame
First he used it
Then he abused it
I tell you you woulda done the same!

 

[jeninflorida]

L O'Donnel was once SHITTING all over Mormons

He was asked if he would say the same about MUSLIMS

He said NO

HE DIDNT WANNA BE KILLED



Nothing more needs to be said

MSNBC is for washed up angry socialist on their way to bottom feed on Current TV

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I propose we rename Chicago CHICAGRO or maybe CHICAGGER.

 

[blobfish]

I say Shitcago.

 

[RjThoughts]

Now, is this coming from Liar-liar-pants-on-fire Ryan?

 

[Busybody]

Now, is this coming from Liar-liar-pants-on-fire Ryan?

here we go again

an R is either RACIST, IDIOT or LIAR

get a better act

 

[RjThoughts]

here we go again

an R is either RACIST, IDIOT or LIAR

get a better act

He is, even was called out by FOX over his Janesville plant closing comment.

 

[Busybody]

He is, even was called out by FOX over his Janesville plant closing comment.

grow up

WHO GIVES A SHIT!

 

[RjThoughts]

grow up

WHO GIVES A SHIT!

Hey, goes to the character of the man, or at least, his speechwriters

Check your facts before you allow the candidte to speak them!!

 

[Busybody]

Hey, goes to the character of the man, or at least, his speechwriters

Check your facts before you allow the candidte to speak them!!

the Obama would be disqualified

let alone ByeDumb

 

[Busybody]

Hey, goes to the character of the man, or at least, his speechwriters

Check your facts before you allow the candidte to speak them!!

wazza matter

Haircuts and dogs run its course/

FACT CHECK: Obama promised and failed to keep Janesville GM plant open

August 30, 2012 | 9:36 am
186Comments





Conn Carroll

Senior Editorial Writer
The Washington Examiner
E@conncarrollDConn on FB



Last night, in his Republican National Convention speech, Paul Ryan said:


President Barack Obama came to office during an economic crisis, as he has reminded us a time or two. Those were very tough days, and any fair measure of his record has to take that into account. My home state voted for President Obama. When he talked about change, many people liked the sound of it, especially in Janesville, where we were about to lose a major factory.

A lot of guys I went to high school with worked at that GM plant. Right there at that plant, candidate Obama said: “I believe that if our government is there to support you … this plant will be here for another hundred years.” That’s what he said in 2008.

Well, as it turned out, that plant didn’t last another year. It is locked up and empty to this day. And that’s how it is in so many towns today, where the recovery that was promised is nowhere in sight.

The Washington Post, and a host of other liberal media outlets, are calling this passage “misleading” because the Janesville plant “closed before the president was inaugurated.” The Post is dead wrong. Here are the facts:

1. On February 13, 2008 Obama said in Janesville : “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.”

2. In June 2008 GM announced that the Janesville plant would stop production of medium-duty trucks by the end of 2009, and stop production of large SUVs in 2010 or sooner.

3. In October 2008 Obama doubled down on his promise to keep Janesville plant open: “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.”

4. In December 2008 GM idled production of GM SUVs at the Janesville plant. Medium-duty truck assembly continued.

5. In April 2009, four months after Obama was inaugurated, GM idled production of medium-duty trucks.

6. In September 2011, more than two years after Obama was inaugurated, GM reiterates that Janesville plant is on “stand by status.” Auto industry observer David Cole, tells the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel it would be premature to say the Janesville plant will never reopen.

6. Today the GM facility in Janesville still has not been retooled “so we can build the fuel-efficient cars of tomorrow and create good-paying jobs,” as Obama promised.

 

[Busybody]

when you "people" resort to nit pick a word or two

show your side being what it is

BANKRUPT

we dont give a fuck what you say anyway

YOU WILL VOTE FOR THE LOSER REGARDLESS

 

[Busybody]

More Importantly, Why Did the Janesville Plant Close?


By Christian Schneider

August 30, 2012 4:29 P.M.

Comments
0







Following Paul Ryan’s invocation last night of the Janesville, Wisconsin General motors plant closing, much of the political chatter today has been about when the plant closed. Was it closed in 2008, as Democrats believe? Was it 2009, as Paul Ryan asserted in his speech last night? Could it still be open today if Barack Obama had taken sufficient action?

Yet it seems nobody is talking about exactly why the plant closed down. While plant closings are always complex issues, two main issues (both somewhat embarrassing to the Left) played a large role: the heavy burden of organized labor and misplaced government intervention in the automotive marketplace.

As George Will wrote at the time, by 2005, GM had essentially become a health-care company that also happened to make automobiles. That year, GM offered $5.2 billion in health care annually to 1.1 million workers and retirees, with retirees outnumbering active workers by 2.5 to 1. When the federal government bailed GM out to the tune of $50 billion in 2010, the United Auto Workers got a 17.5 percent share of the government’s majority stake.

Certainly, Janesville wasn’t immune to union influence with regard to wages and benefits. This 2008 article by the Janesville Gazette documents the history of labor strife at the local GM plant, including a 2007 strike protesting the lack of a national contract. The strike ended 40 hours later, and included a product commitment for Janesville — yet the factory would completely shut down a year and a half later.

Aside from organized labor problems at the national and local level, state government also placed a large bet on a product produced at the Janesville plant that would soon become obsolete. In October 2005, Democratic governor Jim Doyle announced a $5.4 million grant to GM to train workers how to make new Chevrolet Suburbans, Tahoes, and GMC Yukon XLs and Yukons. “I appreciate the company’s strong presence in Wisconsin and its willingness to make lasting investments in the plant that increase its competitiveness and productivity,” Doyle said at the time. “I am committed to building on the state’s long-term partnership with GM,” he added. But soon, gas prices would rise dramatically, and the economy would collapse, cutting demand for gas-guzzling SUVs.

In a sense, this was a reverse-Solyndra scheme; rather than propping up a “green” energy company, the Wisconsin government artificially buttressed one that was more and more dependent on cheap fossil fuel. But once fuel economy became an issue with consumers, the company couldn’t adapt in time to save itself. Doyle’s grant had trapped the company making 20th-century cars in a marketplace rewarding 21st-century technology.

It is easy to see why Democrats want to argue about when the plant closed and not why it closed. Both the crushing weight of employee benefits negotiated by unions and the failed state stimulus plan don’t comport well with their narrative.

— Christian Schneider is a columnist for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

 

[Busybody]

The Truth about the GM Janesville Plant


By Greg Pollowitz

August 30, 2012 11:53 A.M.

Comments
1







Actually, Paul Ryan left out something about the Janesville GM plant — it was one of three plants GM was considering reopening back in 2010. We posted this piece from the WSJ on it. Sadly, Janesville lost out because of “community impact” and its “carbon footrpint.” The bribe from Michigan probably helped as well:

How GM is Choosing its New Plants




From today’s WSJ:


When it was deciding where to build its new compact car, General Motors Corp. made a point of saying it would push politics aside and use strictly commercial criteria.

So Tennessee’s three top officials were astonished last month, in a meeting with GM, when they were told the first two criteria were “community impact” and “carbon footprint” — or how the choice would affect unemployment rates and carbon-dioxide emissions.

“Those didn’t strike us as business criteria at all,” said Tennessee Sen. Lamar Alexander, who was joined in the meeting by fellow Republican Sen. Bob Corker and the state’s Democratic governor, Phil Bredesen. Those factors, Mr. Alexander said, “seemed odd for a company struggling to get back on its feet.”

On June 26, after a monthlong competition, GM tapped an existing factory in Orion, Mich., pushing aside competing plants in Spring Hill, Tenn., and Janesville, Wis.

And . . .


Michigan won the bidding by offering $779 million in business tax credits over the next 20 years, along with $130 million in federal funds for worker training. Local officials threw in additional $102 million in incentives.

I asssume this deal makes the most sense for GM, but I wonder if anyone in Michigan owns a calculator. Is a $779 million business-tax credit for the 1,400 jobs this plant will create really the best use of taxpayer money in Michigan?

So, there you have it. Maybe if the good folks of Janesville all held their breath to reduce their CO2 emissions, they would’ve had a better shot at winning the business.

And, to top it off, the NYT editorialized in the summer of 2008, “R.I.P. to the S.U.V.”

Janesville made S.U.V.s. A fact we pointed out to the Times in October 2008 when Janesville was slated to closed

 

[Busybody]

Take your LIAR bullshit and SHOVE IT UP YOUR ASS

 

[Busybody]

Now, is this coming from Liar-liar-pants-on-fire Ryan?

arent you ASHAMED of yourself with your BULLSHIT?

really?

THIS IS THE ISSUE THAT PLAGUES AMERICA?

You should be ashamed of yourself

 

[Squibbs]

Would someone murder the loser jew fag who started this thread already.

Sheesh.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

He is, even was called out by FOX over his Janesville plant closing comment.

Seems like fact checkers need to do some fact checking of their own assumptions. Paul Ryan’s speech last night included a reference to a GM plant in Janesville that closed, which Ryan used to criticize Barack Obama for failing to meet his campaign promises. A number of “fact” checkers jumped all over Ryan’s anecdote to claim that he lied about the circumstances of the plant’s closure. We’ll just take one example, from the AP’s “fact’ check:

RYAN: Said Obama misled people in Ryan’s hometown of Janesville, Wis., by making them think a General Motors plant there threatened with closure could be saved. “A lot of guys I went to high school with worked at that GM plant. Right there at that plant, candidate Obama said: `I believe that if our government is there to support you … this plant will be here for another hundred years.’ That’s what he said in 2008. Well, as it turned out, that plant didn’t last another year.”

THE FACTS: The plant halted production in December 2008, weeks before Obama took office and well before he enacted a more robust auto industry bailout that rescued GM and Chrysler and allowed the majority of their plants – though not the Janesville facility – to stay in operation. Ryan himself voted for an auto bailout under President George W. Bush that was designed to help GM, but he was a vocal critic of the one pushed through by Obama that has been widely credited with revitalizing both GM and Chrysler.

Actually, those “facts” aren’t quite accurate, either. As the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reported in September of last year — long before Ryan got added to the ticket — the Janesville plant got shut down in 2009, after being notified of their pending closure in December 2008:

General Motors Co. has committed to reopen its idled plant in Spring Hill, Tenn., and keep its shuttered assembly plant in Janesville on standby status.

The commitment to the former Saturn plant in Tennessee was part of a contract settlement reached late last week between GM and the United Auto Workers union.

Since they were shut down in 2009, both the Janesville and Tennessee plants have been on standby status, meaning they were not producing vehicles, but they were not completely shut down. …

The Janesville plant stopped production of SUVs in 2008 and was idled in 2009 after it completed production of medium-duty trucks.

Remaining on standby means not much has changed in Janesville. Community leaders say they would be ready if the GM plant reopened, but no one seems to be counting on that.

...

President Barack Obama came to office during an economic crisis, as he has reminded us a time or two. Those were very tough days, and any fair measure of his record has to take that into account. My home state voted for President Obama. When he talked about change, many people liked the sound of it, especially in Janesville, where we were about to lose a major factory.

A lot of guys I went to high school with worked at that GM plant. Right there at that plant, candidate Obama said: “I believe that if our government is there to support you … this plant will be here for another hundred years.” That’s what he said in 2008.

Well, as it turned out, that plant didn’t last another year. It is locked up and empty to this day. And that’s how it is in so many towns today, where the recovery that was promised is nowhere in sight.

Ryan acknowledged that the plant had already been slated for shutdown in 2008. That was his point. People voted for him because they thought Obama represented hope to get the plant back in operation. In fact, that had been known since at least February 2008, when Obama came to Janesville to speak, and specifically addressed the plant closure in his remarks, delivered at the plant itself — and promised to keep it and other plants like it open “for the next hundred years” (emphasis mine):

It was nearly a century ago that the first tractor rolled off the assembly line at this plant. The achievement didn’t just create a product to sell or profits for General Motors. It led to a shared prosperity enjoyed by all of Janesville. Homes and businesses began to sprout up along Milwaukee and Main Streets. Jobs were plentiful, with wages that could raise a family and benefits you could count on.

Prosperity hasn’t always come easily. The plant shut down for a period during the height of the Depression, and major shifts in production have been required to meet the changing times. Tractors became automobiles. Automobiles became artillery shells. SUVs are becoming hybrids as we speak, and the cost of transition has always been greatest for the workers and their families.

But through hard times and good, great challenge and great change, the promise of Janesville has been the promise of America – that our prosperity can and must be the tide that lifts every boat; that we rise or fall as one nation; that our economy is strongest when our middle-class grows and opportunity is spread as widely as possible. And when it’s not – when opportunity is uneven or unequal – it is our responsibility to restore balance, and fairness, and keep that promise alive for the next generation. That is the responsibility we face right now, and that is the responsibility I intend to meet as President of the United States. …

Those are the steps we can take to ease the cost crisis facing working families. But we still need to make sure that families are working. We need to maintain our competitive edge in a global by ensuring that plants like this one stay open for another hundred years, and shuttered factories re-open as new industries that promise new jobs. And we need to put more Americans to work doing jobs that need to be done right here in America.

That’s the promise that Barack Obama failed to deliver — even when the government took ownership of GM. Ryan had it exactly right, and the fact checkers have made a mockery of their own profession by stepping all over their own biases to refute Ryan.

Update: Guy Benson goes after more “fact checks” of Ryan’s speech from Team Obama.

Update II: More from Reason’s Shikha Dalmia, noting that the Janesville plant was actually one of the choices to keep open when Obama extended the automaker bailout:

Here’s what GazetteXtra.com, a Janesville paper, reported on Feb 2, 2009:

Full-size sport utility vehicle production has ended at the local General Motors plant, but medium-duty truck production is continuing—not starting—in Janesville.

And it likely will continue into May, when the lights finally go off in the facility that has been producing vehicles since 1923.

When GM officials announced last June that SUV production would cease in Janesville, they also said that medium-duty truck production would conclude by the end of 2009, or sooner if market conditions dictate.

What’s more, the administration actually did consider keeping the Janesville plant alive after it nationalized GM by commandeering the bankruptcy process. According to Shepardson’s story:

In June 2009, GM considered three sites to locate a small car: its Orion plant in Michigan; Janesville, Wis.; and a Spring Hill, Tenn., plant slated to close in November. GM picked Orion and later reopened Spring Hill.

Now why would Obama choose to close the only plant he had actively “suggested” he’d keep open? Could it possibly have something to do with the fact that it was in Ryan’s (Republican) hometown? Just askin…

I believe the retrofit costs would have been higher in Janesville, which is why the plant wasn’t chosen — but it’s clear that the plant wasn’t closed under Bush, and that Obama had an opportunity to make good on his promise.

Update III: BuzzFeed’s Andrew Kaczynski finds this promise from Barack Obama in June 2008, after the notice went out that the plant would shut down over the next several months, emphasis mine:

“Reports that the GM plant I visited in Janesville may shut down sooner than expected are a painful reminder of the tough economic times facing working families across this country. 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.” Source: media.gazettextra.com / via:uppermichiganssource.com

Sounds like a promise — and it certainly did to the people of Janesville. Will the “fact” checkers fact-check themselves now?

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/08/30/fact-checking-the-factcheckers-on-ryans-speech/

Liberals truly have no sense of shame or decency...