Paul Ryan Attacks Obama for GM Factory that Closed Under Bush

fucking pathetic

GOP vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan took a swipe at President Barack Obama on Thursday for failing to rescue a General Motors factory in his Wisconsin congressional district, calling it "one more broken promise" on the Democratic administration's record.

"I remember President Obama visiting it when he was first running, saying he'll keep that plant open," Ryan said during a campaign stop. "One of the reasons that plant got shut down was $4 gasoline. You see, this costs jobs. The president's terrible energy policies are costing us jobs."

The attack has already received a fair amount of ridicule because the Janesville, Wis., plant actually closed during the last year of George W. Bush's presidency. What hasn't really been emphasized is whether Ryan clearly knew this and made the charge nonetheless.

According to a rudimentary LexisNexis search, Ryan made multiple public pleas to GM, including op-eds in his home state newspaper, to keep the plant open. He and fellow Wisconsin lawmakers went to the automobile company's headquarters to present plans to extend the plant's life. When the Bush administration itself called the decision to close the plant evidence that the auto industry was trimming fat and improving its bottom line, Ryan called the news "gut-wrenching."

And as it became clear in early-fall 2008 that GM wouldn't relent, Ryan publicly touted the federal tax money he secured to help displaced workers -- a use of funds that would seem at odds with his limited-government, fiscal conservative image.

The timeline is worth recounting now that it has popped up in Ryan's stump speech.

In April 29, 2008, it was announced that 750 workers at the GM plant in Janesville would lose their jobs. Ryan, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, said he would "work closely with those in Janesville facing uncertainty in the months ahead and do all that I can to ensure that they get the assistance they need."


On May 1, 2008, then-Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), along with Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.) and Ryan, sent a letter to Rick Wagoner, then GM CEO, urging the company to join government, community organizations and employers to help the affected workers.

"We ask that you give every consideration to maintaining GM's presence in Janesville, as well as taking future steps to ensure the continued success of the Janesville plant, including considering the assignment of new production models at the plant," the lawmakers wrote.

On May 4, 2008, Ryan wrote an op-ed in the Journal Sentinel calling for a comprehensive energy plan in light of the news that the GM plant was firing 750 people.

"As a fifth-generation native of Janesville, I grew up learning the old saying, "As GM goes, so goes Janesville,'" Ryan wrote.

It was announced in early June that GM would indeed close the Janesville plant and three others. Ryan said it was "gut wrenching."

Later, he joined Feingold and Kohl in writing another letter to Wagoner. "On May 1 of this year, we wrote to you asking that GM take future steps to ensure the continued success of the Janesville plant, including considering the assignment of new production models at the plant. We renew that request now," the letter read.

On June 4, the Bush administration framed GM's decision as evidence the troubled automaker was getting its finances in order.

The Bush White House spokeswoman, Dana Perino, said it was "a sign that Detroit continues to adapt and evolve and address the change in consumer tastes and attitudes. ... They're adapting well and they'll make these changes and hopefully be able to pull themselves up out of what has been a rough several years."

Then-Sen. Obama, who had visited the Janesville plant in February, issued a statement.

"My heart goes out to the workers and families affected by the closing of these GM plants," he said. "Today's news is a painful reminder not only of the challenges America faces in our global economy, but of George Bush's failed economic policies." He finished by pledging to help domestic automakers "with the funding they need to retool their factories and make fuel-efficient and alternative-fuel cars. And we'll invest in efforts to make sure that the cars of the future are made where they always have been -- in the United States."

Ryan was quoted in a Detroit News article that day. "Growing up and living in Janesville, this is something we've always feared," the congressman said, calling the closure "a big psychological and economic blow to our community and our state; but Janesville will survive this, because we simply have to survive this."

By September of 2008, Ryan, who supported the auto bailout so long as the funds didn't come from the financial sector bailout, was still working aggressively to get GM to change its mind. He, along with Feingold and Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), met with company officials in Detroit and "made clear what a tremendous asset the people of Janesville's GM plant are to GM, and how important GM jobs are to the Janesville community." On Sept. 13, the Herald Times Reporter said Ryan and then-Gov. Jim Doyle (D) had presented an "aggressive incentive plan" to GM leaders.

But by then, GM's shutdown plans were set. On Oct. 11, 2008, the Journal Sentinel reported that GM would announce it would close the Janesville plant around Christmas, "at least a year earlier than the company had initially projected."

Less than a month earlier, Ryan was making preparations to help the displaced workers and using federal funds to pick up the tab. On Sept. 18, his office put out a statement that it had joined forces with the U.S. Commerce Department's Economic Development Agency to secure a $450,000 grant to support economic initiatives for the Janesville area.

"This has been a gut-wrenching summer for southern Wisconsin," Ryan said, "and today's announcement provides our community with much-needed support. I remain firmly optimistic that Janesville's best days are ahead."

On Oct. 2, Ryan announced that the U.S. Department of Labor had awarded a $1.6 million national emergency grant to the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development. The money would help "dislocated workers in Rock County's automotive industry, including workers at General Motors, Lear Corporation, Logistics Services Inc., and United Industries."

bump for Farmer

Shouldn't have needed to be saved.

farmer your really going off the deep end buddy, Barrack Obama, John McCain, George Bush, Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney

all men who supported the bailouts

Guess which bailouts Mitt supported (the private sector, just not the auto)

Birdofthad wrote:

farmer your really going off the deep end buddy, Barrack Obama, John McCain, George Bush, Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney

all men who supported the bailouts

Guess which bailouts Mitt supported (the private sector, just not the auto)

Gone off the deep end because I don't think the government should spend all my money and move money borrowed from China to save companies that ran themselves into the ground.

You don't think new companies and other companies would easily to over their market share? You don't think the used car market would start to boom? All that would happen and we'd save all that money.

you live in a fantasy world, i don't hunk you understand what happened in 2008.

Farmer1906 wrote:

Birdofthad wrote:

farmer your really going off the deep end buddy, Barrack Obama, John McCain, George Bush, Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney

all men who supported the bailouts

Guess which bailouts Mitt supported (the private sector, just not the auto)

Gone off the deep end because I don't think the government should spend all my money and move money borrowed from China to save companies that ran themselves into the ground.

You don't think new companies and other companies would easily to over their market share? You don't think the used car market would start to boom? All that would happen and we'd save all that money.

oh shit just got real!

Farmer bringing valid points instead of saying obama is a pharaoh and american citizens are his subjects just to make bird go smoke a blunt and come back to say something about ronald reagan

cough cough, ROn Reagan.....Iran Contra.....cough cough

lol

problem with his claim is that those companies were not going to be bought out and kept afloat in bankruptcy, the banks were tied to the housing market collapse. It was either bail them out or watch our economy collapse even further.

Birdofthad wrote:

problem with his claim is that those companies were not going to be bought out and kept afloat in bankruptcy, the banks were tied to the housing market collapse. It was either bail them out or watch our economy collapse even further.

You don't know that. No one does. I think the economy would be in a similar situation that it is now while prolonging the future collapse when we can barrow or print any more money.

Farmer1906 wrote:

Birdofthad wrote:

problem with his claim is that those companies were not going to be bought out and kept afloat in bankruptcy, the banks were tied to the housing market collapse. It was either bail them out or watch our economy collapse even further.

You don't know that. No one does. I think the economy would be in a similar situation that it is now while prolonging the future collapse when we can barrow or print any more money.

no farmer we basically do know that, because every damn politician in this race and the previous one said it had to be done or our country could seriously collapse financially.

we do know that, this is not some conspiracy theory. the banks weren't lending shit and multiple banks went under and out of business.

Birdofthad wrote:

Farmer1906 wrote:

Birdofthad wrote:

problem with his claim is that those companies were not going to be bought out and kept afloat in bankruptcy, the banks were tied to the housing market collapse. It was either bail them out or watch our economy collapse even further.

You don't know that. No one does. I think the economy would be in a similar situation that it is now while prolonging the future collapse when we can barrow or print any more money.

no farmer we basically do know that, because every damn politician in this race and the previous one said it had to be done or our country could seriously collapse financially.

we do know that, this is not some conspiracy theory. the banks weren't lending shit and multiple banks went under and out of business.

Oh shit a bunch of politicians said it so it must be true. Riiiiiight. A bunch of them said (both sides) that there was wmd in Iran too. Like I said neither if us know.

no it had more to do with realizing the way the economy and business works, its really simple.

Millions of jobs are lost if no one buys these companies out or keeps them afloat during bankruptcy.
Our banks were fucked because of the housing collapse, add in they couldn't pay for the loans they made so banks started to go out of business. You don't understand the 2008 collapse, Im sorry but you just don't get it. Its clear, you don't get why we did the bailout and you want to vote for the same ideology that ruined our country financiallyand brought about the collapse in first place.

Regulation is a good thing.

Birdofthad wrote:

no it had more to do with realizing the way the economy and business works, its really simple.

Millions of jobs are lost if no one buys these companies out or keeps them afloat during bankruptcy.
Our banks were fucked because of the housing collapse, add in they couldn't pay for the loans they made so banks started to go out of business. You don't understand the 2008 collapse, Im sorry but you just don't get it. Its clear, you don't get why we did the bailout and you want to vote for the same ideology that ruined our country financiallyand brought about the collapse in first place.

Regulation is a good thing.

Forcing banks to make loans based on anything other than if the loan is deserving is not a good thing.

Jobs would be lost and then recovered. Are all of Americans all of a sudden going to stop driving because a few car companies go under? You don't think Toyota would start assembling more cars in the USA (they have one in San An for Tundras already)? You don't think the ashes of the fallen big 3 would start over? You don't think someone is paying a few cents on the dollar to buy and do things right? You don't think maintenance & repair would not skyrocket?

But not lets give money to the same people that failed so they can do the same shit over again and fail again.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoodhill/2012/08/15/general-motors-is-headed-for-bankruptcy-again/

Birdofthad wrote:

no it had more to do with realizing the way the economy and business works, its really simple.

Millions of jobs are lost if no one buys these companies out or keeps them afloat during bankruptcy.

Regulation is a good thing.

No simple would make more money than your business costs to stay in business.

Gm employees millions of people?

were does it end? American Airlines and Kodak were not saved. why?

Why did the bailout come after the BK if its about saving peoples way of life? Anyone who invested in GM got jack shit and lost their money. How many Americans had their 401k or IRA with big chunks of GM in it?

GM still has a negative profit margin meaning they have not changed their business model yet its a good idea?

You have said several times now farmer lives in a fantasy world but I am beggining to think its you.

You rap about taking no shorts, stackin Gs and selling drugs,robbing fools. Is that fantasy??

Do you or your homies pay taxes on this loot?

I think its great that you want people to have instead of Have not but your not comprehending what your asking for.

so what? People gave Obama credit for shit he didn't even do! He didn't end the Iraq war! That was the timeline for troop withdrawal under Bush...

and he sure as fuck didn't deserve a Nobel peace prize for the clusterfuck NATO shitted up on Libya

hery Oggy educate yourself an drealize Nobel Peace Prizes are given out on a year to year basis, you receive the Prize based on what you did that year.

Hence Sadat and Begin receiving the Award.

What the hell did Obama do to earn his? Stop eating dogs?

he pissed you off, thats enough for me

Birdofthad wrote:

he pissed you off, thats enough for me

There are going to be a shit ton fo prizes being handed out.

Cu Bu wrote:

Birdofthad wrote:

no it had more to do with realizing the way the economy and business works, its really simple.

Millions of jobs are lost if no one buys these companies out or keeps them afloat during bankruptcy.

Regulation is a good thing.

No simple would make more money than your business costs to stay in business.

Gm employees millions of people?

were does it end? American Airlines and Kodak were not saved. why?

Why did the bailout come after the BK if its about saving peoples way of life? Anyone who invested in GM got jack shit and lost their money. How many Americans had their 401k or IRA with big chunks of GM in it?

GM still has a negative profit margin meaning they have not changed their business model yet its a good idea?

You have said several times now farmer lives in a fantasy world but I am beggining to think its you.

You rap about taking no shorts, stackin Gs and selling drugs,robbing fools. Is that fantasy??

Do you or your homies pay taxes on this loot?

I think its great that you want people to have instead of Have not but your not comprehending what your asking for.

calling birdman

Cu Bu wrote:

Cu Bu wrote:

Birdofthad wrote:

no it had more to do with realizing the way the economy and business works, its really simple.

Millions of jobs are lost if no one buys these companies out or keeps them afloat during bankruptcy.

Regulation is a good thing.

No simple would make more money than your business costs to stay in business.

Gm employees millions of people?

were does it end? American Airlines and Kodak were not saved. why?

Why did the bailout come after the BK if its about saving peoples way of life? Anyone who invested in GM got jack shit and lost their money. How many Americans had their 401k or IRA with big chunks of GM in it?

GM still has a negative profit margin meaning they have not changed their business model yet its a good idea?

You have said several times now farmer lives in a fantasy world but I am beggining to think its you.

You rap about taking no shorts, stackin Gs and selling drugs,robbing fools. Is that fantasy??

Do you or your homies pay taxes on this loot?

I think its great that you want people to have instead of Have not but your not comprehending what your asking for.

calling birdman

i hope bird is ok if not GDP or organic will have to be the talking head for the left

Aight I'll jump in.

Sure if GM had been allowed to collapse, other companies would have eventually picked up the slack. But how long would that have taken. Couple years easy. But at that time stopping the slide was of monster importance.

Bird is right in that people seem to be forgetting the trouble we were in in 2008. And some people seem to underestimate the impact GM going out of business would have had.

As per why not Kodak or AA? Were they ever in serious danger of going out of business? To the extent that GM was? Do either carry the footprint GM does?

Now I do hold many of the core liberal beliefs. However I am not a by the book lib.

US Gov't spends way too much $$$. Can't be this much in dept and say otherwise. But it needs to be across the board cuts(like what Ron Paul advocates) and not "lowering only this while still raising that" polices that both sides want to push.

I am an environmentalist, I do think the Gov't MUST play a big role in protecting it, but I also know Beauracracies are a bitch.

I think Gov has to play a role in helping the poor, but current policies seem to help perpetuate extreme poverty as much as it helps ease the pain of that extreme poverty.

I think the Rich do need to pay more, like shrinking gov't, I think raising taxes on these guys is obvious.

Aight, gotta role out for morning skate sesh, but I just wanted to get those ideas out there b4 I head out.

captain organic wrote:

I think Gov has to play a role in helping the poor, but current policies seem to help perpetuate extreme poverty as much as it helps ease the pain of that extreme poverty.

I think the Rich do need to pay more, like shrinking gov't, I think raising taxes on these guys is obvious.

Aight, gotta role out for morning skate sesh, but I just wanted to get those ideas out there b4 I head out.

1) It is perpetuating it. People who don't work and aren't doing anything are getting free money. Why would they change that?

2) I assume you aren't "rich" so saying they should pay more is easy, but why on earth do people who work hard and have become successful have to be forced to not only pay more, but pay at a higher percentage. That just is more incentive to not work hard. Redistribution doesn't work.

1)Well for many people, it's a pride thing, not everyone wants free money. So trick is, how do u get the disenfranchised poor, back into the prideful workforce. How do u inject that pride into what, in the most problematic areas, is a downtrodden psychology.

It's a worthy debate that no one is willing to get into, because they are stuck on the platform sound bites.

2)Sure it's easy, it should be easy for anyone. These people make Millions, or even billions.. And it's not for working harder, certainly not in porportion to what they make.. No one works harder then a nurse, and I'll say in many instances, what they do is more important then what some financial guy does. Yet the nurses get paid a fraction of what the rich make. By extension, while the rich get paid out of porportion to the work they put in, they should be taxed at higher %'s. Seems so clear to me. Remember these guys continue to be rich after the taxing. This is not a complete leveling of the field. Results show it's not even close actually. Rich are way up there, poor and even middle class, are way down there.

Also these people have huge sway over the "free market". They dictate where the money goes. There needs to be some balancing factor. Maybe it's unfortunate, and Im sure u red's don't want to hear it, but I see no other entity other then gov't that can effectuate any sort of balancing measures.