Paul Ryan's marathon

LOLLOL wrote:

And this current Liar/Bigger Liar ticket would be a third Bush term with the added bonus of an anti-woman and anti-minority agenda.

A friend equates it as misremembering you broke 100 as breaking 80.

Would that be a fair analogy

4 hour=100 strokes

3 hours = 80 strokes

Thanks Leadville Native, I had a feeling he was lying about the 14ers, but your post lays it out perfectly.

Why does the fact that the Republicans have more women and minority governors than do the Democrats imply that the Republicans do not have an anti-women and anti-minority agenda?

Answer? It doesn't.

rojo wrote:

I still think my original assertion that most people will view this one way or the other based on their party affiliation was accurate.

Dude, the reason people are flaming you on this issue is because you're a freaking marathoner and industry insider and you 1)either fail to see what's obvious about this guy's BS story or are just choosing to defend it, and 2)you're trying to draw in some comparison about politicians and lying that have little baring here. We all know they all lie, this particular lie is about running which is why the discussion is blowing up on your boards. It makes you sound pathetic, defending someone that you, of all people, ought to see right through. If, as a runner, you can look at what was said about this marathon claim and the blowback associated with it and only see conspiracy or gotcha bias then you should maybe reassess your system of interpreting the world around you.

Remember when? wrote:

I'm not sure how much Cornell cost when WeJo attended, but I think it's safe to say he didn't get his money's worth.

I'll say. Especially since he only got credit for the courses that he took at Yale.

I hope so! This IS a family site, after all.

krugman on the marathon claim

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/03/opinion/krugman-rosie-ruiz-republicans.html

While I still disagree with Rojo and the its only a digit even though its not excuse , I appreciate you doing the right thing by allowing the thread to go back up.

@dpmrunner I didn't read your post but clicked on the whatobomadid link and the first H.R. I looked at on the site was wrong. It states that HR 1171 is something about veterans, but it's the marine debris act.

I cannot take you or this site seriously now. Sorry.

Apparently, you're not aware that a bill is identified not only by its number but also by the session of Congress? In other words, HR 1171 will be different from one year to the next, as it will be a different session of Congress. The site is referring to HR 1171 from 2009. You're referring to HR 1171 from a later year. Here's a link showing that your research is faulty: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr1171

Scooter McResearcher wrote:

@dpmrunner I didn't read your post but clicked on the whatobomadid link and the first H.R. I looked at on the site was wrong. It states that HR 1171 is something about veterans, but it's the marine debris act.

I cannot take you or this site seriously now. Sorry.

I think the thing that's most telling about this whole, seemingly unimportant story, is what it says about the rest of us by the way we choose to react to it. What makes people excuse and explain away blatant lies when told by members of the political parties we choose to affiliate with? And why do people do that?

The Paul Ryans of the world are just the product of our own collective ignorance. These guys lie--and lie often--because we reward them for it by sending them back to Washington over and over again. And then bitch about it and send them back again. We get the government we deserve.

logical man, Let me see if I can explain this to you. Those of us in the human species often use colloquial speech which is widely understood and accepted by other members of the human species. So when a question is posited regarding whether a person is a liar or not it is widely understood that the question is whether that person has a very strong proclivity toward lying not whether the person has ever lied before. To some, understanding this nuanced distinction doesn't come easy. Stay with it you'll eventually get it.You can believe me because I'm not a liar. (although I have have lied before)

Logical Man wrote:

Would you care to re-phrase your question?

EVERY SINGLE HUMAN BEING ABOVE THE AGE OF 2 YEARS OLD IS A LIAR (probably most who are under 2 are as well, though it is a bit harder to pin them down). As a result, your question, "Is he a liar or not?" is equivalent to asking, "Is he a member of a set of beings WHICH CONTAINS THE ENTIRE ADULT HUMAN POPULATION as a subset?"

Again, care to re-phrase?

It sounds like he is as honest about his times as any letsrun.com has been or the typical politician. That being said, I am a legit sub-3 hr. marathoner who started running in my 30's when I was 50 lbs overweight. It was a big goal for an amateur like me and I did it 8 days after my 40th birthday. I had to get my mileage above 80 miles a week for a year while starting a business so his lying about this really offends me. I am going to now vote for the guy that really summitted Everest ( Gary Johnson ) - I's serious. I don't like liars and Ryan seemed to be really honest before this blatant lie.

@random lawyer

I would think that any bill pre-2010 would have been introduced under a democrat controlled house and senate. This got buried in a Dem. controlled sub-committee and in fact was sponsored by a hose republican.

I feel that, even though I was wrong, and thank you for letting me know how it works, the website seems to be misleading and not trustworthy per se.

Liar: Noun - A person who tells lies.

You my friend are a liar. And by your post it would seem that you are one with an unfortunately strong proclivity toward lying.

In logical man speak you just called me human. HOW DARE YOU!!

Logical Man wrote:

Logical Man wrote:

Would you care to re-phrase your question?

EVERY SINGLE HUMAN BEING ABOVE THE AGE OF 2 YEARS OLD IS A LIAR (probably most who are under 2 are as well, though it is a bit harder to pin them down). As a result, your question, "Is he a liar or not?" is equivalent to asking, "Is he a member of a set of beings WHICH CONTAINS THE ENTIRE ADULT HUMAN POPULATION as a subset?"

Again, care to re-phrase?

Liar: Noun - A person who tells lies.

You my friend are a liar. /quote]

Ronald Reagan had speech writers concoct huge fictional speeches he used to inspire his base and platform. The cadillac driving Welfare queen who was making 100 grand a year was made up. The brave officer who stayed with a serviceman who was stuck in a shutdown plan in WW2 was made up.

Paul Ryan is an insecure dude who when questioned feels pressure to give an answer to make him look better even when it doesn't matter. I don't think he's pathological though. Just insecure. I'm sure he will work on this. As hard as it might be for him. He's trying to pump himself up in a cut throat political race. Like Hillary dodging the bullets in Bosnia.

If he really forgot that he ran 4:01 instead of 2:55 it just means he figured its not an important question and if he got away with it it was a chance to look cool and if he didn't it wasn't a gamebreaker. He's still a douche. He's a politician what do you expect. Doesn't mean he can function well in that role.

No he is not insecure at all (you don't get where he is by being insecure) but he does have an excessively inflated ego which is need of constant feeding even at the expensive of truth and reality.

break it up wrote:

Paul Ryan is an insecure dude who when questioned feels pressure to give an answer to make him look better even when it doesn't matter. I don't think he's pathological though. Just insecure. I'm sure he will work on this. As hard as it might be for him. He's trying to pump himself up in a cut throat political race. Like Hillary dodging the bullets in Bosnia.

If he really forgot that he ran 4:01 instead of 2:55 it just means he figured its not an important question and if he got away with it it was a chance to look cool and if he didn't it wasn't a gamebreaker. He's still a douche. He's a politician what do you expect. Doesn't mean he can function well in that role.