Paul Ryan's marathon

Get on it, Letsrun!

Guy O'Leighken wrote:

He's also claimed to have climbed "around 40" of the 54 14,000 foot peaks in Colorado. And he got at least one glowing opinion article about it (in the Denver Post). Any chance that's exaggerated too? Apparently everyone who summits those peaks has to fill out a register...

No, there is no requirement that everyone who summits a 14,000 foot peak has to fill out a register. I live here, I've summited 12 of them, andf I've signed some registers and not signed others (and some don't even have them - or at least they're not easily spotted among the rocks).

So you just lied. See how easy that is...

rojo wrote:

I never said he didn't lie.

I just said I think there is a chance he didn't. He very well may have.

I do know Biden is a proven plagiarist.

I don't like voting for the lesser of two evils but again I'm not voting based on VPs. I dont think I could ever vote Biden in for anything - I'd have to just abstain from voting or write in someone.

Wow Rojo, this is really pathetic. Just give it up. It's obvious he lied and you are grasping at straws.

I think you are right that people will see this by their own biases, but they will see the lie as not that big a deal if they are a Republican. You have to be borderline delusional to think he wasn't lying in light of the circumstances and the rest of that interview.

You really are being disgustingly hypocritical by defending Ryan based on the way you have attacked numerous other athletes with far less proof that they were cheating or taking drugs.

This site does a great job at tracking down cheats and liars and bringing their deceit to light. It is a shame that you are undermining your own website with this embarrassingly bad defense.

September 1, 2012

RYAN CALLS NOMINATION GREATEST TRIUMPH SINCE WINNING TOUR DE FRANCE

by Andy Borowitz

NEW YORK (The Borowitz Report)—Fresh from the 2012 Republican National Convention, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) today called being nominated for Vice President his greatest personal triumph “since I won the Tour de France, in 2006.”

“That feeling of adrenaline when I was onstage with Mitt,” he told reporters on the campaign trail. “It felt exactly like that when I crossed the finish line in Marseille.”

When a reporter pointed out that the Tour de France ends in Paris, not Marseille, Mr. Ryan said, “My bad. I’m always mixing them up, ever since I won the Open 13 tennis tournament in Marseille.”

Mr. Ryan said he would bring an athlete’s focus to winning the White House in November: “Every little boy dreams of winning a World Series or a Heisman Trophy or getting to the White House. I’m already two out of three.”

Read more

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2012/09/ryan-calls-nomination-greatest-triumph-since-winning-tour-de-france.html#ixzz25HU7Qcrc

rojo wrote:

I've never started a race at the back of the pack, butI just assumed it would take several minutes.

I have done 30-seconds of research on the matter and my suspicions are correct.

The 2010 Boilermarker results are up online. The 2000 finisher got to the finish line some 2:16 after the start.

2000 Suzanne M. Buck F# 398 24/498 F45-49 1:18:18 8:25 1:16:02 8:10

http://www.leonetiming.com/2012/Roads/Boilermaker/15kGunTime.htm

The 1990 Grandma's marathon had more than 2000 finishers as Ryan finished 1990th in the race. So he very likely did run the 26.2 miles in the high 3s - not high 2s.

There is a very believable explanation for this mixup. He just got confused with 4 and 3 hours. It's not like he ran 3:30 - he ran just under 4 hrs and he said he ran just under 3 hrs.

But why would he start at the back of the pack?

After all, he was fast when he was younger.

Rojo- Your assertion that he ran in the "high 3's" might not be accurate after-all.It is impossible to say how long it took him to cross the start. I ran a marathon with over 1000 people and lined up mid pack. Care to guess how long it took me reach the start? Try 27 seconds.

I find it ironic that you defend this guy who clearly lied. I ran hundreds of raced in the pre chip days and never claimed I ran anything other than the posted "offical" times.

He knew he was telling a lie, but that's OK I guess if you're a republican. But be honest Rojo, if this same quote came from a Democrat we ALL know how you would be treating it.

Heartily agree: "This site does a great job at tracking down cheats and liars and bringing their deceit to light. It is a shame that you are undermining your own website with this embarrassingly bad defense."

I admire this site for its integrity. Rojo's weak defense--I'm just saying maybe he didn't do it--is disheartening. By Rojo's standard, no one should condemn Lance. After all, there is a chance he didn't lie/didn't dope. And, if we shift to politics, no one should condemn Clinton. After all, there is a chance he didn't lie--maybe he truly didn't understand what the meaning of is is.

If you really intend to stand by your man by giving him every benefit of the doubt, I request that you give every doper and cheater the benefit of the doubt.

Rojo--You have every right to vote for who you want. And Paul Ryan's lie is no big deal. But, within our little geeky community that you helped create with this website, Paul Ryan is a liar. That matters.

The Paul Ryan affair has been great for LetsRun--this community used its knowledge and enthusiasm to trigger national coverage of the VP. Thumbs up to us. But it has been bad for Rojo. Thumbs down to the site's co-founder for abandoning his own principles, turning his back on the essence of running, and damaging the site's brand, just because of his own politics.

But, all this said, this debate is quite fun. I love LetsRun.

Come on, this is hilarious. Just enjoy it and not argue too seriously. Both candidates will be skewered fairly or unfairly - this is a US prez campaign and it just happens to be highly entertaining!

The libs are playing the race card.

Rojo - what the hell man? It's not a big thing to acknowledge flaws in other people or even cast a vote for them knowing they have flaws or questionable character. But you can't even acknowledge that a blatant lie is a lie. And the lie is about running and you're a huge runner and coach, and - and! - you run one of a handful of the biggest running websites on the web. That to me is just sad man. All the miles and days of lacing 'em up, and it's all just discarded so cavalierly? Not cool. It's weird that having arrived at that point you couldn't even rationalize to just not comment on the subject at all.

My favorite part of Slowpoke-gate is that Hugh Hewitt is no journalist -- he is a conservative water carrier bought and paid for by the GOP. A better-educated Rush Limbaugh. And he helped Ryan shoot himself in the foot!

The possibility that he misspoke about the sub-three, meaning to refer to a sub-four, evaporates given the interviewer's reaction and Ryan's response. As a former HS racer, he wouldn't claim that a 3:50 something was fast. I'm not lecturing anyone on whether they should care or whether Biden is better or worse. But it is pure delusion to think that the statement is an honest mistake. He made the statement, got the desired props from the interviewer and doubled down with the comment that he was fast back then.

+1

If I were interviewing someone for a job and they kept bringing up one of their hobbies (as with Ryan and fitness), and I asked them some simple questions, then later discovered that they had lied (or misspoke, it honestly wouldn't matter), I would simply discard their resume.

The sad thing is that in any job field I've been in, I would rightfully assume that there was a stack of resumes, and within it would be an honest, qualified and competent applicant - at least honest enough to not lie during the interview process. In a way, the entire run-up to the election is like a job interview held by the citizenship to hire the president and vice president. And the entire stack of applicants consists of people I wouldn't trust enough to hire as middle class office workers.

Thanks for writing this. It's the best rebuttal of rojo's lame "Ryan apologetics" in this entire thread. And it's interesting that rojo carefully chose to ignore it while responding to other, weaker ones.

bad analogy wrote:

Hell, it's not like he lied about ... the facts related to the presidential commission on the deficit. Now THAT, if he had done that, that would be some serious lying, I'm sure you'd agree.

Stop it. Just stop it. The fact that Ryan voted against Simpson-Bowles in no way gives the lie to his contention that Obama ignored its recommendations. The two occurrences aren't even logically related. Yes, Ryan opposed the recommendations, because he he disagreed with some of them, but did agree with their basic cost-cutting thrust, and tried to improve them (from his perspective). And yes, Obama did ignore the commission's work. Even if Ryan, like Obama, had ignored it, that would have rendered his claim hypocritical, but not contradicted it.

When the supposed "fact-checkers" called Ryan's statement a lie, it only demonstrated how befuddled and compromised they are. Now you're parroting their mistake? Bend the knee, please!

I generally vote Republican and would consider myself a libertarian these days. I am going to vote for Romney.

Regardless of the fact that I am voting Republican, I think Ryan's lie is kind of pathetic. I have really liked him in the past but this takes him down a few notches.

It's really not a big deal what his running times were. I'm not sure this is really an indication that he is a big time liar, it is maybe more an indication of insecurity. Haven't we all met someone who was uncomfortable talking about their inferior times and cringed as they so obviously told a blatant lie about what they ran? (My favorite: A fat Saudi engineering student once told me he ran under 9 for the 100m).

I am surprised Ryan is one of those kind of people, especially given that he was never a big time runner. Why does he care what we think of his athleticism? Frankly I'm impressed with his condition at age 41 since I am 41 now and in relatively poor shape. I could run a lot faster than "high 2's" when I was young.

I guess we will all find out more as he continues to campaign. At this point I think he's either one of those pathological braggarts (I doubt it, this is more Al Gore's style), or someone who is a bit of a perfectionist and is embarrassed by not being good at some things, and having to live up to the hype that he secretly knows is not really true, he kind of threw out a big number.

He was probably reveling in his reputation as a fit Congressman before, and now has to answer specific questions about his fitness and feels like a bit of an idiot since he's nothing special in the world of fitness. Unfortunately he committed the cardinal sin. Again I am a bit surprised he is one of THOSE guys. That kind of personality where he can't handle not being good at something he does and cares too much about what people would think of him if he was only mediocre at something...

Here are our candidates:

Obama: Delusional narcissistic control freak

Romney: Consummate politician, opinions change as needed

Biden: Shameless fool

Ryan: Insecure exaggerater

I'm so depressed.

Cognitive Dissonance

Rojo is a runner, he knows Ryan's statement is b.s., not mispeaking. All runners know this, it's just one of those things to know one's marathon time, especially if it's your only marathon even if many years ago.

Rojo seems to be a republican, therefore must support the cause and defend.

Hard to reconcile these two things I suppose, but one in this dilema might say something like, "ya, you guys make a good point, he really stepped in it this time". Instead, he brings up Biden (who is likely not a saint either), and 57 states. But why deflect?

How about just a simple "my guy screwed up" and leave it at that and start a new thread about Biden, Obama, democrats, ect?

rojo wrote:

He said he just broke three - when in fact he just broke 4.

Totally agree with Robert on this. Four is extremely close to three. There is no integer closer to four than three.

Bill Clinton may not have lied, either, for that matter. Who among us hasn't used the wrong word before? So who's to say he didn't mean, "I never had sexual INTERCOURSE with that woman."