Comments about ‘FACT CHECK: Romney's clunker claim on auto bailout’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Nov. 9 2011 9:59 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
phatness
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

This was a misleading, poorly written article. "THE FACTS" (I love how that was all in caps - as if that made the "facts" stated somehow more impenetrable to scrutiny) seem to actually be skewed statistics with a fair amount of spin. I'm sure there will be some readers that will fact check the facts in the article and post in the comments.

The shame is that only a fraction of the people that read the article will read the corrections presented in the comments. Alas, the media still has such sway on what we think, and therefore how we vote...

JohnJacobJingleHeimerSchmidt
Beverly Hills, CA

Romney, come on, stop pandering to the far far right.

If anyone educated themselves on the auto industry you would realize that of GM and Chrysler went under, parts suppliers that support ALL BRANDS would have suffered. Parts such as airbags supplied by Auoliv etc. would not have survived and you wouldn't have been able to buy a new car from any manufacturer.

Also, the manufacturing base of this country is eroding and Romney supports sending those jobs overseas? How am I not surprised. Another reason I can't be a registered Republican and went independent, they support companies that are sending US manufacturing jobs overseas and are always looking for ways to do it.

Isthisforeal
BLACKFOOT, ID

This author is I'll informed. EPA means eliminate production agriculture. The regulation is ridiculous and growing. There are issues the EPA is court ordered to do and still moves at a snails pace. Regulation costs business big in this country and forces the creation of non revenue producing jobs. The kind of jobs Washington loves.

Perhaps this author should get out from behind his desk and see the real world of the EPA.

The Rock
Federal Way, WA

Somebody should fact check the fact checker.

Chrysler and GM bond holders were legally in the first position to be paid. Obama over rode their legal rights and instead gave away the store to the UAW.

Robbing Peter to pay his buddies is what Obama does best.

As for Obama Care. Heck yes that is a drag. I recently launched a new business and I refuse to hire any direct employees because of Obama Care. Regulations create a huge barrier to entry for manufacturing businesses. The regulatory burden costs American's $1.75 Trillion each year. Many of these regulations do little but increase costs and make life difficult for employers.

Get rid of the abuse and watch the economy take off.

Isthisforeal
BLACKFOOT, ID

As I sit in a meeting with an EPA employee tomorrow I can promise you he cannot even provide the information I will need to comply with their new regs. They are anybodies guess, but the new regs will move forward on the backs resource related industries.

Has this author ever produced anything but his opinion?

fed up
Provo, UT

How can this article pretend to be journalism? This is nothing but a distorted, biased attack on anyone opposing the would be dictator Obama. Please stop printing this article as "news."

If GM had been allowed to go under, the bond holders (who were guaranteed first priority) would not have been wiped out, the union would not have been protected and a successor company(ies) would have arisen placing the auto industry in a stronger position without government and union ownership.

Big government, big unions and big businesses are wrong. Make them all much smaller.

FDRfan
safety dictates, ID

Is all of this misinformation because of ignorance or by deliberate design to achieve a goal? Either way it is reprehensible. But the important question is: do we really want the truth?

KM
Cedar Hills, UT

How is it that the government owns a stake in either of these companies? Is this free market capitalism or is it communism? Why the government owns any part of these companies is beyond insane. Too big to fail...we'll see.

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

Why doesn't someone actually investigate where all the "bailout" money actually went within GM and Chysler? Answer: because Obama and the Democrats are hiding where it actually went; the UAW! Honestly folks, where do you think the money actually went? And some of you get down on Romney for asking honest questions that every American should insist on knowing! Dirty money anyone?

liberal larry
salt lake City, utah

Pinch me I must be dreaming, DNews published something even mildly critical of their favorite son!

3grandslams
Iowa City, IA

So I get it now. Republicans can't make generalized statements, it's considered wrong. But the Dems can spout off generalizatoins all the time and get a free pass (i.we the tea party is racist,conservatives hate illegal immigrants, they want to destroy social security, etc).

Nice double standard, I haven't even talked about the treatement liberals are giving Cain vs. Clinton.

Voice of Reason
Layton, UT

OK...this "article" clearly belongs in the Opinion section, even though it was written by an AP reporter as a straight news story. The entire article is a debate against GOP political positions, not an actual "fact check". A true Fact Check should stick to clearly verifiable black/white facts that are not the subject of partisan debate, i.e. everyone can agree on what's true.

Example: Everyone would agree that saying the US population is 200 million, when it's verifiably 300 million, is a fact check. But saying that regulation isn't really a problem for US businesses is another story entirely - that's a political argument subject to complicated debate. You may think you're right, you may even BE right, but it's no "fact check."

bandersen
Saint George, UT

Christopher: Unfortunately, I don't believe a word you said. Show me a writer, or politician, that will just tell the truth about why America is suffering right now and why Government isn't the answer to relieving that suffering and I'll know you are beginning to see the truth! Otherwise, the partisan bickering will continue.

Kim
Cedar Park, Texas

Thank you for printing this article. During election years politicians get fast and loose with the facts. This year is seems to be worse than others. Newspapers provide a great service when they hold politicians to account for their distortions and misrepresentations. I find your article fair and unbiased. The facts that you quote are not your own, but from reputable economists not tied to politicians.

Vince
the boonies, mexico

That is a "great" article! It doesn't meet the thinking and ignorance of the ruling majority in this state, but it tells these dreamers that maybe just maybe they should fact check more than they do instead of spouting and whinning constantly!

pragmatistferlife
salt lake city, utah

Nice "The Rock", you start a business but you're unwilling to provide health care for your employees..the single most important source of health insurance for americans. Now if you pay your employees an extra couple of bucks an hour so they can buy their own insurance good for you. I doubt that's the case though given you said you chose to hire temps so you don't have to provide any health benefits. You are the very reason the health care act was passed and why the government has regulations. Regulations are intended to blunt, mitigate, or change the undesireable effects of free markets. You are free to start a business, however the fact is access to health care is primarily obtained through employment, so if a society deems access to health care for everyone desirable then when employers don't provide it, society/government may step in and alter that outcome for the good of society. Yes you may be creating jobs but you are also thwarting a desired goal of society in the process.

Not a perfect outcome here, but large societal goals are being met here. Solution..take health insurance away from employment..single payer.

Jonathan Eddy
Payson, UT

Regulation is the problem?

How much regulation was in place during the mortgage backed security debacle. NONE! Government uncharacteristically turned a blind eye, allowing Wall Street to create their own Casino Royale, fleecing millions out of trillions.

I have no faith in any candidate that lacks the courage to call a spade a spade.

sergio
Phoenix, AZ

It seems the only candidate in the debates whose true interest is in serving his country the USA is Ron Paul. The others it seems their primary interest is their self interest: they want the glory of president for themselves and they are willing to say or do what ever it takes to get to the top.

joe5
South Jordan, UT

Vince: Can you list the "facts" stated in this article?

Like a previous poster, I see a lot of opinion, a lot of spin, a lot of interpretive analysis, but I see almost nothing that I could call a "fact." Perhaps you view them as "facts" because they happen to be more in line with your political viewpoints but doesn't that make you guilty of the same charge you levied against "the ruling majority in this state?"

larri3
Farmington, UT

A friend and I decided not to buy a business two years ago precisely because Obamacare was being discussed. The business is a national franchise that provides a service at a moderate cost. At the time Obamacare had not passed and most experts thought that it would not pass, but the problem for us was that it was projected to cost the company approximately the same as it was making in profits. We did not want to put our assets at risk by buying a company that might end up breaking even. We backed out, the business shut down, and all the employees went on unemployment. Multiply this scenario a few thousand times, and you'll see that Obamacare indeed has had an extremely negative impact on the job market.

I also have seen how regulations hurt business. I've given up two businesses primarily because of onerous governmental regulations. Huge businesses can afford to hire full-time employees to deal with thousands of pages of regulations and mountains of paperwork. A small company can't do it. Goodbye small business. Hello Walmart and Bank of America.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments