Yes - he lied. It wasn't stimulus money. That is an absolute, irrefutable fact. Next question?
So @meester man and @right is right (is wrong yet again...) - instead of blaming facts learn to accept them.
And @xu - instead of inventing vague, handwaving conspriracy theories - just accept that in this case factcheck checked the facts.
And @jim - I seriously doubt you'll have the minerals to accept that you were wrong in this instance, but ever the optimist I'm saying it's worth a try....
As for your second example - I'm not sure what your point is. What Biden said was true. Even your own argument concedes that, so why should factcheck say it was false? While what Ryan said was "technically true", it was extremely misleading in that, as factcheck pointed out - Ryan is counting giant hedge funds and thousands of other multimillion-dollar enterprises as “small” businesses.
Hey Jim - would you like to quote this from your own link?
"RYAN: "Look at just the $90 billion in stimulus the vice president was in charge of overseeing — this $90 billion in green pork to campaign contributors and special interest groups."
THE FACTS: Dismissing an entire package of energy stimulus grants and loans as "green pork" ignores the help that was given to people to make their homes more energy efficient, grants to public entities constructing high speed rail lines and tax credits to manufacturers to install equipment fostering cleaner energy.
To be sure, there were notable failed investments, such as $528 million to the politically connected and now-bankrupt solar power company Solyndra. But Ryan's claim made it sound like every penny went down the drain.
More broadly, economists are nearly universal in saying Obama's $800 billion-plus stimulus passed in early 2009 helped create both public-sector and private-sector jobs, even if they fell short of what sponsors had hoped. Douglas Elmendorf, director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, estimated the stimulus saved or created more than 3 million jobs."
Hey @Jim - only you could dismiss an entire package as "pork", with the evidence "it's all pork to me" to back it up, then faced with the evidence that the package saved or created more than 3 million jobs, fall back on "any wealth redistribution is pork and should be stopped."
You should have said that, as an opinion, to start off with, instead of making completely ludicrous claims about facts, none of which you cared about anyway, and saved us both some effort. The facts are not important to you, so I don't know why you're even debating them. What is important to you is the purity of your free market ideology.