Discussion on:

Romney criticized over Jeep production debacle

Romney even refuses to admit he was wrong in this case and ignores questions about it. The more I know about him the more I believe it's all about getting elected and he'll say and do whatever he has to do to that end. I don't think he's very concerned with governing afterwards if he is elected. I'm not that happy with Obama but at least I know what to expect with him. I have no clue what Romney would do and I'm not willing to just trust him.

First of all - Obama lied to Janesville employees when he 'essentially' said if they voted for him, the GM plant would not close. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TsV_Z0NPCA
I think the Romney quote is an oversimplification of the issue. Most people can't think big enough to realize that many of those jobs were lost in the recession. SOMETHING, I would hazard a guess as it being the Obama administration, is causing 'new' jobs to be created (as Obama sees it) or old jobs to be re-created (as Romney sees it) in China.
It's really philosophy that decides where you fall. Are they new jobs? Or are they old jobs that should have been 'reestablished' in the US?

I think it doesn't matter which side anyone falls, but everyone should be asking themselves, "What can we do to ensure these jobs are created in the US instead of China?" Instead, everyone is picking sides on a particular quote where neither side is exactly wrong. Short-sighted, poorly informed public. tsk tsk tsk. You get the government you deserve.

This is not an "either the U.S. or China" situation. The factories in the U.S. build vehicles for purchase in the U.S. The new factories in China build vehicles to be sold in China. The facts here have nothing to do with philosophy. It may be possible to build the Jeeps in the U.S. and export them to China, but that depends on the Chinese government allowing it, and it also might make the vehicles too expensive to sell in that market.

Regardless, the facilities in China have nothing to do with the facilities here.

All Jeeps are made in the US now, and some are exported to Asia. If they're shipping all the parts over there anyways, where's the cost savings? There are currently import tariffs on large engine imports into China - but is that enough of a reason to manufacture there? Especially since the 'new Jeep' referred to sounds like it wouldn't have the large engine to be subject to the tariff. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-21/fiat-says-china-may-build-all-jeep-models-as-suv-demand-climbs.html

Regardless, manufacturing occurs in Asia and those products are shipped back to the US ALL THE TIME. With the job climate the way it is, ANYTHING that spurs job creation outside of the US needs to be thoroughly examined - not 'poo poo'd.

The production in China is because Chrysler/Jeep sees significant growth in car sales in China - and wants (sensibly) to build closer to the market. These are not Chinese workers being given US jobs to produce for US consumption. Jeep has increased and plans to continue increasing US jobs for cars to sell in the North American market (and maybe Latin American - I don't know). The point is, the implication that this is about losing US jobs is totally false - and its obvious the Romney camp, like everyone else except perhaps the uninformed voters they are trying to trick, knows that.

The Janesville plant was closed before Obama took office! It closed Dec. 23, 2008. http://factcheck.org/2012/10/whoppers-of-2012-final-edition/

Also in perspective, Romney's quote is that "All" jeeps would be made in China.

Yes the plant slowed production in December.

When was Obama running for office?

When did he make the promises?

When was he elected?

When did the plant close? May 2009. It stopped producing SUVs in December 2008. It still built Isuzu trucks until being put in a "standby capacity" in May 2009.

Knowing the plant was scheduled for a shutdown at years end candidate Obama promised to support having GM retool the plant to build other vehicles. No such government effort ever happened.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/janesville-gm-plant-closed-2009-after-obama-promised-save-it

I appreciate this article, even though I really don't think it belongs on "SmartPlanet." This is supposed to be a forum for environmental issues and technologies, not for political grandstanding.

I despise both candidates and will not be voting for either. Nonetheless, I think that the photo of Romney with a Pinocchio nose is politically charged, highly biased, and totally unwarranted.

You don't think pointing out that someone running for our highest office is out and out lying is unwarranted?
Amazing.

When every time I point out an Obama lie, like Benghazi, I get called a racist by some nit wit.

Try reading my comment again without your own biases showing through. I said that I appreciated the article, but that the Pinocchio nose was unwarranted.

It was directed at harrim47

I get burned up that challenging Romneys statements is ok ( as it should be) ,but when people ask for a little civility, like no nose games, they are met with a response like Hs.

Yet if one dares to challenge the president it is often met with furious outrage and cries of racism.

The editorial distortion of the photo is in very bad taste, and a violation of the journalistic ethics I learned in college. Why can't a CBS product just present facts / opinions without distortion and without attacks? Is this such a hard ethical issue? What ever happened to impartially presenting facts? And whatever happened to editorial oversight?

The photoshopped nose may be in bad taste BUT I don't see distortion the way Fox News does. When Romney blatantly lies during a debate and the moderator does quick fact-check Fox news takes exception to it. So Romney can lie through his teeth to suit the moment but a news channel can't call him on that? I fail to understand the logic !

Are you seriously insinuating that Obama was being truthful when he said that he called the Benghazi attacks an act of terrorism in his Rose Garden address the day after the attack?

Any reasonable person who heard his speech or read the transcript knows that that is simply not true. He did utter the words "act of terrorism" but that was not in regard to the Benghazi attack but rather just a general reference after mentioning 9/11, etc.

If he truly felt that the Benghazi attacks were acts of terror, then why did he and his administration claim for the next two weeks that the attack was a spontaneous protest in reaction to the anti-Islam youtube video?

If you want to support Obama that is fine, but can't you at least be honest and admit that he lied during the debate about claiming that he called the Benghazi attack an act of terror the day after it occurred and that Romney had it right? The moderator interjecting herself at that point was inappropriate and biased, and Fox taking exception to it is what real journalists are supposed to do. They are supposed to report facts and not their own opinions. Maybe you've forgotten that after watching too much MSNBC.

SmartPlanet is now openly a Democrat organ. I mean we always knew it was, but at least now they are shedding their pretense of being anything otherwise. I appreciate the honesty.

Smart Planet and CBS are in cahoots with the democratic party, and would do all things possible to have Obama re-elected.

CBS is acting like a division of the democratic party, with Smart Planet being a sub-divison of the democratic party.

...do you not remember how they threw Dan Rather under the bus when he got caught pretending to be a journalist? Just remember that he was already a 1%-er and had a pretty good severance package.

a supposed "journalist" was caught falsifying documents, and reports, which is a big NO-NO in anybody's book.

When the whole world was talking about how corrupt Rather had been, CBS could not cover for him any more.

...even though they might possibly had been not "real".

And remember that Dan tried to blame is staff; after all, all he really does is read the stuff, or so he said at the time.

At least we discovered what the threshold for CBS was; a pretty low bar by any standard. As long as the story fits the narrative, it's fit to print as-is.

Then it would be called Stupid Planet... If you don't like it, leave. No one will miss you.

But fortunately, articles like this expose it for what it is, and destroys credibility. I like that.

While trying to attack a political candidate, SmartPlanet has lost the confidence of many members and watchers. Now that SmartPlanet is getting in on the politics it no longer has credibility for their stories. They are obviously not a journalistic organization but rather a campaign for their own opinions.

Regardless of Mr. Romney's defense of the veracity of his ad, it's not the whole truth. While it's factually true, it's only partially true, particularly because of the implication of that partial truth-telling. In essence, the implication becomes a lie in itself.

For those of us who don't find Mr. Romney all that attractive as a candidate, the image with the article is funny. I do agree with the criticism, though - the picture is unnecessary to convey the point of the piece. And the actual article itself is an awkward fit here. Perhaps next time...

GM has plants in India and builds cars here. So does Ford. We have differential import duty structure for components and completely built vehicles. May be China does too! So what is wrong if GM or Chrysler puts up a plant in China and creates jobs there to supply the local markets at competitive price structure? It makes more sense logistically and economically. May be the situation is that it would be impossible to sell US built Jeeps on these grounds.