What are liberals to do when a conservative gives the speech of a lifetime and they know it?
Make stuff up.
This morning my attention was drawn to a particular Washington Post editorial in which an ultra-liberal there took Paul Ryan to task for appearing "to suggest" something that's "not true."
See "Mr. Ryan’s misleading speech."
To quote: "Mr. Ryan ... offered a speech that was part introduction of himself and his small-town origins, part testimonial to his running mate and — in largest part — a slashing and, in many elements, misleading indictment of President Obama as both a spent force and a threat to American freedom." [emphasis mine]
The first tip-off that this is an unjustified, empty, devoid-of-facts charge that Ryan had, "in many elements," been misleading is in the understanding that the editorial provides exactly zero examples of it.
And the only link it gives us is to another Post op/ed piece in which another ultra-liberal makes one charge of same. See "Ryan misleads on GM plant closing in hometown."
So how did Ryan mislead us?
Here's what he said in his speech last night about a Janesville, Wisconsin plant that has closed:
"Right there at that plant, candidate Obama said: ‘I believe that if our government is there to support you … this plant will be here for another hundred years.’ That’s what he said in 2008. Well, as it turned out, that plant didn’t last another year. It is locked up and empty to this day."
Where does that suggest that the plant closed as the result of anything Obama did? Or that it closed at any particular point in time after Obama's speech?
It's a fabrication. A stretch. A desperate attempt to obfuscate. To prevaricate.
We learned in 2006 - with regard to another election - that the editorial board of the Washington Post will do anything - including perverting the truth - to get its liberal candidates elected.
Remember that, and this episode, when you read the schlock these lowlifes write.