E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe White House wanted President Obama's jobs bill to take center stage this week. Instead, many eyes are now squarely focused on the solar-panel manufacturing company, Solyndra, which recently declared bankruptcy.
At issue: Did the Obama administration influence and rush a federal review of a $500-million-dollar loan to the company so that Vice President Joe Biden could announce its 2009 groundbreaking? Some Republicans in the House say the answer is “yes,” but White House officials dispute the allegations.
Yesterday, a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee released documents and emails that are now at the center of the debate. “Our investigation raises several questions about where the administration did everything it could to protect taxpayer dollars,” said GOP Rep. Fred Upton, the chairman of the full committee.
Emails first reported in the Washington Post show OMB officials acutely aware of time pressures. According to the Post, “One e-mail from an OMB official referred to ‘the time pressure we are under to sign-off on Solyndra.’ Another complained, “there isn’t time to negotiate.’"
During Wednesday’s hearing, officials with the Energy Department’s loan office and the OMB insisted their actions were not politically motivated. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney also pushed back, telling reporters that the emails are being misinterpreted. “What the emails, I believe, made clear is that there was urgency to make a decision about a scheduling matter. As you know ... it is a big proposition to move the president or to put on an event ... so people were simply looking for answers about whether or not we could move forward.”
Carney also pointed out that the company was initially put under review for a loan during the Bush administration.
The Obama administration gave the Silicon Valley-based company stimulus money as a part of its push to invest in green energy programs. The president visited the company last year and hailed it a stimulus success.
Solyndra, however, was forced to declare bankruptcy and lay-off 1,100 employees last month, when competition from foreign companies made it impossible for the company to stay in business. The subcommittee hearings continue into next week when two executives with Solyndra are expected to testify.
Leave a Comment:
It is also a distraction to the taxpayers who are wondering why Solyndra got the money from Obama in the first place! Didn't the White House do any due diligence of this company first? There has to be an explanation on why a company would go bankrupt after such a generous gift from the Feds! WHERE DID THE MONEY GO?
The most expensive photo op since "Mission Accomplished".
BTW How many teachers could have been employed for a year on this $500M? How many schools repaired? How many bridges fixed?
At best, the Obama administration is sloppy.
At worst, corrupt.
This one looks like a little of both.
Maybe Barry will have some answers about this in his next speech.
The Solyndra money went to the same place the 'cash for clunkers' money went and the ATF's 'fast and furious' money went and Obama's stimulous money went....etc, etc into the great progressive void!
I too hope we get answers on this and before the election!
Gee, the Nasty Redhead is usually the first one to respond to virtually EVERY FR post. I guess this one didn't interest her.
"Move along, nothing to see here, move along"
It was interesting to watch the PBS News Hour last night regarding this story... they focused quite a bit on the orders coming from the White House to hurry those loans along...
Hmmmm....
Here's the real question I think everyone should be asking. $500 Million is a lot of money, even for a company to account for. When was the money transferred and how long before it was gone. A year, two? I've heard liberals make the claim that companies go bad or are bad investments... in their assessment anyone can make a bad choice... Sure, if it's a small investment... but $500 million? How fast did they go through that money and what was it spent on. Clearly it wasn't payroll for a hundred employees... what materials were used? How much equipment did they buy and isn't some of that equipment salvagable? Or.. did the money go elsewhere... like in someone's campaign fund?
Priceless, what Republicans don't ever seem to have is any level of PERSPECTIVE:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/feb/08/usa.iraq1
that money just VANISHED,...
this is nothing at all like the 500 Million 'wasted' on Americans and American projects
Yeppers, these things are EXACTLY the same; but the real irony,...no one's looking for the BILLIONS lost in Iraq - sorry not 'lost' methinks they know exactly where it is; but it's already been spent - Over There, Over There!
The HORROR!
You gotta' hand it to the last administration,...incompetence was their trademark!
Then they wonder why the RWNJ's have lost ALL credibility!
Remember Cantor voted to spend 120 BILLION building bombed out schools in Iraq and refuses to spend ONE DOLLAR on American infrastructure...
"review of a $500-million-dollar loan to the company"
Agree totally, Clara!
Billiions lost in Iraq.....and nothing said or investigated....
Halliburton and Blackwater (Xe)...Now that's a combined theft that should really be investigated!
The libbies are chiming in on this subject and just as I though they have nothing to say other than half-truths, lies, and deflections...! Blaming Cantor and Rove, lol!! Stay on point libbies,the topic is misappropriation of Federal Funds! capische?
How much has the Pentagon lost and can not account for?
Jumping the shark there aren't you sparky? lol
The investigation was completed WHEN?
Business-is-always-a-risk, we say. But will GOP get past the risk/trap me-me-me-me excuses and create jobs for millions of Americans? Or will they pass up the opportunity once again.
Our President Barack Obama is out there fighting on our behalf to make jobs for millions of Americans. GOP voted down four jobs bills this year. GOP Governors have already fired 600,000 workers on the pretext of budget cuts.
PASS THE AMERICAN JOBS ACT AND NEVER MIND THE GOP TEARS.
Carol Leonnig has been reporting on this story for The Washington Post and watched the hearing today. She joins us now.
We saw those exchanges on Capitol Hill today. Did they help fill in any part of this story? Did we learn anything new about the life cycle of Solyndra?
CAROL LEONNIG, The Washington Post: Not a terrible lot was learned about the life cycle of Solyndra. But you heard a more full-throated explanation from the Department of Energy and the Office of Management and Budget inside the Obama administration why they believe the -- you know, that they were making good decisions at every juncture when it came to extending support to Solyndra and when it came to extending sort of a crisis lifeline to Solyndra earlier this year.
RAY SUAREZ: What was the nature of the relationship? Was cash transferred from the federal government to this private company?
CAROL LEONNIG: It's a pretty complicated transaction, but here's the basic effort of this program that Jonathan Silver was describing -- $38 billion in the loan guarantee program basically is to invest in clean energy technologies and different companies that offer to do that through a government-backed loan.
In the case of Solyndra, they won the government-backed loan, but they also got it from a federal Treasury bank at a very low interest rate. So it's basically like the government saying we will guarantee that if you can't pay this half-billion-dollar loan, which is what Solyndra got, we will pay it off, which means taxpayers will pay it.
RAY SUAREZ: So now that the company has gone bankrupt, taxpayers are on the hook for, what, the whole amount?
CAROL LEONNIG: Well, energy officials tell me that they are concerned that it will be a large portion of the half-billion that has been disbursed to Solyndra so far.
They're worried about what kind of assets the company really has even if it sells them in bankruptcy and what other debts it has to its investors. What taxpayers will get may be very small.
RAY SUAREZ: So the government lines up with other creditors at this point?
CAROL LEONNIG: Yes.
RAY SUAREZ: Has a government program with a subsidy to a company like this ever failed this spectacularly before?
CAROL LEONNIG: Well, there's a long history in federal policy, going back to probably Roosevelt, of different ways in which the government has tried to stimulate a targeted industry and has made a mistake along the way.
What's unusual is, this is the first big public misstep for what has been Obama's showcase of recovery. Here is the way the president says he has generated jobs and tried to spur a new industry on American soil.
A lot of economists say that's really a noble goal, but that perhaps the DOE -- I'm sorry -- the Department of Energy didn't always have the competency to make the best selections about which projects would really fly.
RAY SUAREZ: Well, if you just know the end of the story, you may be scratching your head, but what attracted federal officers to a company like Solyndra in the first place to make this loan?
CAROL LEONNIG: Right.
They have said repeatedly that the innovation that Solyndra was offering was -- gave it extra marks. The innovation was essentially, you know, a photovoltaic panel that goes -- that stores solar energy and is usable inside a building and stores energy.
But what was unusual about this one was, it was cylindrical. It would be expensive to manufacture the panel, but it would be really cheap to install it like on big-box Wal-Mart stores. And that gave it an edge.
The problem was that Solyndra's equipment was so expensive to produce that they never got to take advantage of sort of the installation -- the low cost for installation. But here's the issue, actually, Ray, with Solyndra and why people have so many questions about them.
This company was flagged by independent auditors in 2010 as being pretty quick to burn through cash. And even when they were applying to the Department of Energy in 2009 for this very large, whopping loan guarantee, internally, these e-mails show that even at the Department of Energy, there were staffers saying they have got cash flow problems that we can see off in the distance.
And, indeed, that's exactly what happened. They burned through a lot of cash. And at the beginning of this year, they confided privately to the administration they were going to go bankrupt unless they got emergency cash.
RAY SUAREZ: Well, didn't the Obama administration at that point double down and give them some of that emergency cash?
CAROL LEONNIG: In a form, yes. They pressed investors to put in a little extra cash in exchange for an agreement that they could get their cash out first, their new cash.
They also agreed that they would let them repay the loan more slowly. And they also agreed to special terms whereby Solyndra would keep getting installments on the existing loan. Remember, you don't give the whole half-billion all at once.
So, from that time of warning until today, taxpayers have now got another $67 million extended to this company that was really on the brink of collapse.
RAY SUAREZ: Now, this is a company that approached the Bush administration for a similar kind of help and was in the process of this request. It got handed over to the new administration.
Did it not get approved during the Bush term because there were perceived problems with it then or was it on its way?
CAROL LEONNIG: There's a lot of spin on both sides on that. It's a great question that you ask. It's true that they applied under the Bush administration program, which was eventually recycled essentially by the Obama administration and given new life.
But the problem with the Bush administration program is, it was never really fully funded, so applicants complained bitterly that they couldn't -- it wasn't really attractive to them. The White House says, you know, look, the Bush administration was looking at this program. They thought Solyndra was really attractive.
On the other hand, Republicans point out that as -- literally as the Bush administration was walking out the door, there were committee meetings to discuss, should we move forward with this loan? And the vote was, no, we have more questions about cash issues, actually.
So were they about to land a big loan with the Bush administration? Unlikely. Were they being reviewed as a serious contender? It looks like they were.
RAY SUAREZ: To be continued.
Carol Leonnig of The Washington Post, thanks for joining us.
CAROL LEONNIG: Thank you.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec11/solyndra_09-14.html
The GAO first raised questions on this, and a few other half billion dollar taxpayer paybacks, a year ago. iWatch picked it up, and ABC has done several pieces on it since that time.
It took this long for the rest of the media to notice.
What is needed now is a special prosecutor, to look into ALL of the monies that flowed from the taxpayers into Obama donors' pockets- most often, tenfold in payback what they donated to Obama.
This is corruption that rivals Teapot Dome.
What makes this thread hysterical is the suggestion,...no DEMAND for accountability and **GASP** REGULATION!
Which, according to Republicans just yesterday would STRANGLE innovation, nay STIFLE it - at the very least snuff the little sucker right out.
They literally talk out of both sides of their mouth so much, they don't know which side to feed; but by the looks of Limbaugh and Christie they apparently opt to feed BOTH! Priceless.
Republicans - We Need MORE Government Oversight and Regulation and we need it NOW!
Please pass the Dramamine GF -- all the spin is making me dizzy! lol
How about we get some federal regulations that regulate the federal government?
How about one that forbids campaign donors from being appointed to advisory positions that dole out taxpayer dollars to other campaign donors?
Steve Westly, big Obama bundler, is the energy department's advisor on doling out tax dollars to companies like Tesla, (his baby), Solyndra, (George Kaiser's baby), and other "green" jobs companies- all headed by, or heavily invested in by, Obama big dollar donors.
The media seems to have missed this. IWatch did not- but the media still ignores it.
Some may complain about naming this corruption. I say of it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and is constantly seen in the company of ducks, I can safely conclude that it is, in fact a duck.
Still don't like it? Prove me wrong. Get a special prosecutor to take a look see.
Why are left-wingers afraid to address this issue?
Of course, the White House was in a hurry to move this loan - that's what it was basically; a loan. If Solyndra had started showing success, there was a fabulous opportunity to trumpet their winner. This was a "green" energy project and it would kill two birds with one stone if it succeeded.
Now, it appears that the products of Solyndra are far beyond justifiable costs. No sound business person is going to buy a product that doesn't have some sort of positive return. There really would be no payback. Additionally, it looks as though there might have been some financial irregularities. What the hell is it with you bitchers? Do you think them there nasty libruls are dancing in the streets? We wanted success even more than you wanted failure. OK! It failed, and somehow you think you won. You're sick.
There will be many more failures than successes on the road to finding a way to convert direct solar energy into an inexpensive power source. Let's remember that petroleum is a solar product and the government subsidizes that industry to this day, even as it turns out record profits. By the way, President Bush ran an oil company into the ground and he had proven technology at his beck and call, and Republicans went right ahead and elected him - not once, but twice.
Businesses are loathe to invest in solar energy research and development. Although the right wing loves to sing the praises of private enterprise, the fact is private business is risk-averse. They demand guarantees. That is reality.
Government must step in, as it always does, and prod investment in R & D with incentives. There will be winners and losers. However, it takes only one success to make us forget failure. If we are the first to meet with success, it guarantees that the U.S. will return to its role as world leader.
We are running out of cheap energy, and we are using vast amounts of incredibly filthy energy feedstocks. We have no choice but to invest in alternative fuels. NONE. Expect failure. That's the way it works, but pull for success. And in the meantime, quit your damned sniveling and finger-pointing. Like it or not, we're all in the same boat.
I applaud the President for doing everything possible to invest in a company that could produce renewable energy. We need this.
The only problem was that Solyndra wasn't able to compete against foreign company's because of the large variance in wages and material costs.
Until we revamp our laws that balance our wages/material costs against those of other countries, we will always come out on the bottom. Someone has to pass legislation that protects American companies against the manufacture of goods made outside the U.S. We need to create a balance through extremely high import costs on goods that balance the field. Until that time, we will continue to have high unemployment as more U.S. companies move operations overseas.
It was recently announced that Ford Motors would build a Billion dollar plant in India. That may be good for Ford, it's investors and India, but it certainly isn't helping American workers. But if there were laws that taxed the heck out of imports that balanced the costs, eliminated tax breaks/holidays, Ford, GE, and all other U.S. companies wouldn't have a reason to manufacture elsewhere.
Clara - you got it totally wrong. Conservatives aren't concerned about regulation unless it's over regulation... and certain government actions need to be regulated but they seem to by pass when its according to political expediancy.
I love the way the liberals are deflecting out their butts. Anything that would spotlight something bad on Obama... IMMEDIATELY - it's Bush, Bush, Bush. I have a newsflash for you liberals. Bush is NOT the president. What's done is done and the liberals had plenty of time to go after Bush if there was any impropritety...
To counter the Iraq war issue... the freeing of 25 million people from a ruthless dictator is a pretty good reason. Not many countries can do it in the world... but we stepped up to the plate. I guess libbies wanted the Iraq people to remain enslaved to Saddam. My gosh the libbies will never learn... bitch, bitch, bitch... that's all we hear from them... except when it comes to Obama.. then it's excuse, excuse, excuse.
I'm really looking forward to seeing the MSDNC prime time Obamapoligist Stooges try to spin this one. I'm already snickering in anticipation of FOTFLMFAO at my two favorites: the Wiffleball Comedy Hour and De Rev. Al's Comedy Hour.
Read and learn
http://www.iwatchnews.org/2011/03/30/3845/green-bundler-golden-touch
Oh, and do be sure to note the date on the story.
Given that the Energy Department has 63 open investigations of loans govern to "friends and family"- I'd say that Obama is going to be distracted for some little time.
Yeah, that's a real tragedy. Who's in charge of that again?
Speaking of MSDNC prime time Stooges, I was channel surfing and caught Maddow whining about Republicans considering plans to change the way electoral votes are allocated that might not benefit Barry as much as the current method. She stated in a self-leftuous tone "And with a Republican controlled legislature and a Republican Governor, nothing can stop them!!"
Boo Hoo.
Seems to me that I remember a famous, revered, lefty liberal telling the Republicans a few days after his inauguration "Elections have consequences and we won."
Yes, I distinctly remember that being said.
"Solyndra distracts the White House"
It's more like "An Inconvenient Truth", as in "We got caught". How can we 'spin' this?
Food for thought...
The way Obama's White House moved this 'LOAN' along kind of reminds me of the whole mortgage debacle... His personal GREED and CORRUPTION led to a loan that should have never been made.
Think about it libbies... Think about how much you loath those EVIL lending corporations and Wall Street for what they did with those home loans.... then tell me how much you love Obama for doing the same thing.... personally benefiting from someone that couldn't possibly pay back that loan!
Sorry, typo in #1.25: I left out the state. It was PA.
David Walker - Why are left-wingers afraid to address this issue? ... We wanted success even more than you wanted failure. OK! It failed.
I'll give you your first click of approval on your post. Yes we wanted success and we will ask questions and find out what happened. I am none too pleased that this loan was granted apparently when warning signs were given against it but not heeded.
However the righties should understand that we don't need to have the focus entirely on this issue. The report for the causes of the BP oil spill came out the other day did they have the same outrage for BP and their shirking of regulations and safe building practices?
This is an issue that needs to be investigated, however, bigger things are going on. Domestically people need jobs. At this point with the exception of policies involving environmental issues and ensuring that regulations are met, everything else needs to take a back seat to allow for more hiring.
Big problems. The stock market is jittery over European markets. On the foreign policy front Egyptian rioters attacked and burned the Israeli embassy over the weekend. Libya still is not stabilized, troops are still dying in Iraq. In Kabul the green zone was attacked from terrorists within its borders. The US plans to veto Palestinian statehood when it comes up in the UN, the right call as Israel doesn't agree and the parties haven't negotiated on this; however how will this affect our relationship with the Arab world? I can tell you all the positive attitudes and hopes of the Arab spring will be lost.
The White House and liberals should cooperate with the GOP on this. Unlike the GOP aversion to investigating the Bush administration, their half truths and countless FUBAR's the liberals will ask for the questions to be answered.
This experiment failed and did so badly, but further innovation and research in green techonology is needed to move us away from FFF - finite fossil fuels
Then focus on this, Mark
http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/181731-report-white-house-pressured-general-to-support-lightsquared
So, the White House pressured an Air Force General to alter his testimony that a wireless network owned by one of their big donors interfered with military GPS.
Nice.
I was one of the people who, despite the misuse of special prosecutors in the past, did not think ot was a good idea to throw that particular baby out with the bathwater.
Looks like I was right.
The only thing more breathtaking than the incompetence of this administration is it's arrogant corruption.
Because the truth will make them look bad. I mean expose them. Uh, mess with their guy. Diminish their credibility (except for the Kool-aid crowd). etc. etc.
No Jo... the arrogant corruption is a symptom of the total incompetence... they are actually tied together. Here's what psychcentral.com says about Obama's condition:
Narcissistic Personality Disorder
By Psych Central Staff
Narcissistic Personality Disorder is characterized by a long-standing pattern of grandiosity (either in fantasy or actual behavior), an overwhelming need for admiration, and usually a complete lack of empathy toward others. People with this disorder often believe they are of primary importance in everybody's life or to anyone they meet. While this pattern of behavior may be appropriate for a king in 16th Century England, it is generally considered inappropriate for most ordinary people today.
Symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder
In order for a person to be diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) they must meet five or more of the following symptoms:
Other countries subsidize the "winners" and I get that. But where are conservatives in asking about bailing out the banks -- The same banks that are now trying to get out of paying the money back?
We need to reestablish manufacturing jobs here in the US, and invest in the future like renewable energy. Not only to create jobs here, but to end our dependence on foreign oil. We should approach this in a NASA-style way and invest in far more than Solyndra. The question should be how can we do this better?
Ah, the REAL reason this is som important to right wingers.
Yes, this is serious business. But is it more serious than jobs? The economy? The country? Yellowdog, you are spot on in your comments.
As David Walker so eloquently pointed out, a lot of business is a gamble. Particularly in emerging technologies. But you can't afford not to gamble because that's the way innovation happens. That's the way the technology advances. If we existed solely on the sure thing, we would be nowhere near as advanced as we are technologically.
This needs to be read before you people really start passing judgement:
http://act.alternet.org/go/11121?akid=7569.305691.ui3KMr&t=18
It is rather eye-opening.
I'm just glad that someone's asking questions about what happened with Solyndra.
The loss of a half-billion taxpayer dollars and 1100 jobs is an important story, worthy of every bit of media coverage it's now receiving.
It ought to be more than a "distraction" to the White House.
One addendum to this article:
President Obama visited the Solyndra solar panel facility in May 2010, and hailed it as a "green" energy success story; two months before that visit, an independent auditor was questioning whether Solyndra could survive.
I'm looking forward to the libbies spin on this story! I'm sure it will be more entertaining than hearing my granddaughter's explanation on why she broke the ketchup bottle this morning! Lol!
The best thing is that the standard languge used by the independent auditors is pretty brutal and no one, not even a clueless low level govt stooge could misinterpret its meaning:
The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note (X) to the financial statements, the Company has suffered recurring losses and has a net capital deficiency. These conditions raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. Management's plans in regard to these matters are also described in Note (X). The financial statements do not include any adjustments relating to the recoverability and classification of asset carrying amounts or the amount and classification of liabilities that might result should the Company be unable to continue as a going concern.
Wasn't "Sheriff Joe" Biden put in charge of the stimulus money so that this sort of thing did not happen? Does anyone remember the 20 million given to Amtrack to renovate Joe's station? (later named after him) I have a feeling this thing is going to grow.
Well...the libbies response will always be deflection to another issue. It's amazing that they won't either defend Obammy or criticize him. They just sit there with their mouths flapping about someone else. As for "Sherriff Joe", do you mean "Suma Wrestler" Joe Biden or perhaps "Sleepy" Joe Biden??
I actually meant Vice President Biden. President Obama gave him that nickname if I remember correctly. My point was that these are reasons that people are unwilling to jump on this wagon again. If we are going to start more infrastructure projects then we need to see where the money is going.
But that's the problem Maggie... this administration accounts to no one. Do we really know how much of the stimulus money was used, and where? I realize that the CBO is supposed to keep track of it, and they probably have some figures... but how correct are those figures and how much witchcraft has been played with them. The American public will never know the whole truth because we are lied to all the time.
I live in small town USA and we received some of that stimulus money. We had the beautiful big signs outside a Dog Park and a really lovely entrance to our town complete with stone walls,decrotive lighting and newly planted pine trees and one road over you can lose your car in the potholes. There has to be a better way.
That's okay, Maggie. I live in an area where the signs have been up for a year and a half.
That's it- just the signs. No work, road or otherwise.
Well, I guess the sign makers got something out of it. . .
I have to drive over the interstate between Florida, Alabama and Louisiana. There has been roadwork in Florida going on forever. I-75 in Florida is in need of some serious paving - On I-10, in Louisiana they have been working on that same stretch of road for 3 years. In Alabama, I-65 has ongoing road work but they have a 10 mile stretch between Montgomery and Mobile finished and still have the warning barrels up. It seems it takes forever to get the roadwork done. Being in construction, the usual culprit for slow work is lack of funding. If all this money was supposed to be devoted to shovel ready... there may be shovels, but the ready is surely lacking.
Wasn't "Sheriff Joe" Biden put in charge of the stimulus money so that this sort of thing did not happen?
_______________________________________________________
Yeah, they put Barney Fife in charge when the needed "Dirty Harry" Callahan.
BriabB: If you know we are being "lied to all the time", why do you believe what you were told about 9/11 by the same people who refused to allow a subpoena empowered, security clearance, and witness protected investigation?
For the same reasons, Paul, that I don't believe Obama's school records prove he's the smartest president we've ever had.
When it comes to 911, I saw the planes hit the buildings. I saw tower 7 fall. 911 happened right in front of our eyes. Now whatever you are alluding to is beyond my capabilities to comprehend. Do you actually think 911 was an inside job? If so, that's your choice. I don't because the obvious would have surfaced by now... meaning people talk and especially something that big would have brought out all those seeking their own fortunes.
You saw flight 11 hit the North Tower did you? Not on 9/11 you didn't. Did you call 911 to report that a 757 had hit tower Number 1? Why not? And then you ran down to Battery Park on the other side of the complex to watch the south Tower get hit by a 767, and then you ran back up North of WTC#7 to watch it come down at FREEFALL Accleration speed. Is that correct?
How about you answer my question.........Why no investigative body with the powers required to discover the truth and lay the conspiracy suspicions to rest??? 9/11 isn't supposede to be a matter of FAITH, it is a mass murder about which all "answers"should be a matter of cross-examined FACT. Yet this has been denied to us.
Your idea that whistlenlowers would talk, in order to get rich, is childishly naive. They have no one that they could talk to without revealing who they are to the planners of the operation, and their stories would never be permitted to be published or broadcast anyway. They know their story would never get out to the public, and they and their families would suffer for trying to tell Americans the truth. Hence the need for a witness protected investigative body.......were you not paying attention when you read that in my previous post. News executives interfered with Dr. Steven Jone's interview about WTC#7 on the Tucker Carlson show. Why did they feel the need to sabotage a news piece they had given prior authorization?
Try to remember that you claimed to KNOW that we are being LIED TO all the time, but when I point out that 9/11 is an obvious LIE, you attempt to defend the LIARS. You are being illogical, probably for partisan reasons.
TARP was repaid. We know the money went anywhere but where it was needed, business loans.
A pure distraction from real talk, Pass This Bill for millions are jobless. Another maneuver by GOP/TP distract attentions and keep derailing the economy.
Till date, no concrete answers as to why we invaded Iraq and plundered Billions of $ and thousands of lives. Billions lost to fraud in Afghanistan.
Party of no ideas, quit obstructionism.
Of course... we should all just ignore the corruption in the White House!
Prove it.
we can prove false invasion of Iraq
we can prove $billions lost to fraud in Afghan.
we can prove GOP shielding of the rich and corporation not paying taxes. e.g GE $14.2 billion.
sacking judges who did not comply with bush admin.
Intentional identity release of CIA Officer, Valerie.
Another attempt to hang onto something while doing nothing about creating JOBS.
Oh... be careful what you ask for there PEN...
The investigations are just starting ;-)
Another attempt to hang onto something while doing nothing about creating JOBS.
_______________________________________________________________
The "fierce urgency" of what should have been done 2 1/2 years ago...
Harry Reid is feeling the "fierce urgency" of maybe sometime in October...
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/15/us/politics/democrats-in-congress-balking-at-obamas-jobs-bill.html?ref=todayspaper
_________________________________________________________________________
President Clinton balanced the budget and created 22 MILLION jobs, while under the cloud of a special prosecutor for YEARS...Somehow he managed to excel...
Uh, PEN? This waste was as a result of the FIRST stimulous program. It gets added to half a billion to a Chinese manufacturer of wind turbines to be planted in a field in Texas that is owned by an Obama donor, a half billion to Tesla motors for electric cars that will, if ever manufactured, cost more than $57,000 each- for which Obama thoughtfully enacted a $7500 tax credit- Tesla, by the way, is the bay of Steve Westly, another major Obama donor. It joins Evergreen, another solar company that Obama touted, in both getting taxpayer funds and going bankrupt. Evergreen, I might add, is ALSO a firm that is headed by a big Obama donor.
Do yourself a favor- go to iWatch, and read all about the Obama donors who got tenfold in taxpayer dollars what they put in to Obama's campaign coffers.
He's not just an inept failure, he's corrupt to his core.
That's right. like many tax payers, let know the true intent. of the loan.
PEN - the way you started this thread out is called deflection. You deflect what's going on now to something that Bush did... you insinuate that corruption occurred without any backup... that's called obfuscation. Since there are no reported cases of corruption concerning the Iraq war, it then turns into a lie. The liberals do this all the time. They take a supposition and transform it into a lie because the liberal thinks we conservatives can't catch it. Then another liberal jumps on the bandwagon and takes what you say as gospel so in essence you not only lie, you promote a series of lies. Something to be really proud of.
The issue now is developing. There are assumptions being made, but only based on what's known right now. No matter how you look at this, with Obama supporting and promoting the development of premature green energy, he looks really stupid at the moment... because his ideology has gotten in the way of common business sense. And you wonder why the conservatives don't trust his judgement.
Sick of the bickering, you had no trouble ignoring the serial corruption in the Bush WH. What's changed? If you had complained then about the billions lost to corruption under Bush, then maybe you'd have some credibility complaining about 500M lost to a company that was honestly thought to have potential in future technology.
You win some you lose some. This administration has a lot more economic wins in under 3 years than the previous ever had in 8. But that's understandable though because the focus of the previous administration was never to improve the economy but rather to enrich it's supporters. That was obvious then, and it is still obvious now!!
BrianB, you sound like freaking Rumsfeld! What are you selling!
Brian, this whole thread is deflection. From jobs, the economy, the country.
I'm waiting for the influx of conservatives who will complain that the Obama administration didn't provide enough oversight of the Solyndra loan, while John Boehner will give a speech this afternoon in which he will argue forcefully that all business needs to thrive is for government to get out of the way.
What politician ever passed up a good photo op, anyway?
And as always, we have the private sector complaining that the government failed to protect them from themselves.
And speaking of "due diligence," perhaps we ought to back up to the war in Iraq as the plainest example in the past decade of an administration blowing by obvious red flags.
And then, of course, we have the S&L scandal back in the Reagan administration.
Then we have all the drugs that pharmaceutical companies pushed through the FDA approval process too quickly that turned out to be dangerous. In addition to less regulation, Republicans would also like to take away the rights of those injured by defective drugs to sue for damages.
And finally, we have the newly released BP Horizon report, which seems to place the blame squarely on BP's failure to obey industry standards -- not even government regulations -- for oversight and redundancy in safety systems.
http://www.oilspillcommission.gov/sites/default/files/documents/FinalReportIntro.pdf
Who knows? Maybe conservatives are making a lot out of Solyndra so they can deflect attention from THAT report. As far as I know, conservatives are NOT pushing for greater safety regulations for deep water drilling.
Shiny object, shiny object.
@AM
But isn't this the administration that called for Smarter Government? Why would they ride roughshod over their own procedures? It's not the case of more regulation, it's that they didn't follow current regulations. And this is not the case of the private sector screwing up. This is the misuse of public funds. There is fraud going on here somewhere because someone misrepresented the ability of this company to be a viable entity. The question is whether it was someone in Solyndra or whether it was a government employee.
And your right this corporate cronyism just as the no-bid contracts given to private companies in Iraq. That is why I have been saying for months that this Administration is a bunch of political hacks who are as bad as the last Administration.
Finally, if you accept that this is a government screw-up, why would you trust the same people with 10 times this amount in a jobs bill?
Anna Molly, yes,
Business-is-always-a-risk, they will tell you. But will GOP get past the risk/trap excuse and create jobs for millions of Americans? Or will they pass up the opportunity?
Our President is out there fighting on our behalf to make jobs for millions of Americans. GOP voted down four jobs bills this year already.
PASS THE AMERICAN JOBS ACT AND NEVER MIND THE GOP TEARS.
1100 lost jobs are a "shiny object", AM?
A half-billion dollars in taxpayer money down the drain is a "shiny object"?
The left should be furious about what happened with Solyndra if they really believe in government activism with regard to "investment" in green technology...or even if they simply believe in good government. Or, for that matter, accountability.
You should be at least as upset about what happened at Solyndra as I am, AM.
Because, going forward, government funding for such projects is going to come under increasingly intense scrutiny...and, it should. Solyndra tells us that, if nothing else.
You might even have to put some of your own money into these projects, to make up for the taxpayer funds lost at Solyndra.
Heaven forbid, eh?
That's right, AM:
Corporations are PEOPLE and as such they ALWAYS do the right thing, instinctively and without exception because well, that's what we've come to expect from them, as people, you know, fellow AMERICANS with the American People always front and center of every decision, transaction and consequence.
What could possibly go wrong with reducing government, you know, limiting their 'over reach' and well, you know, protecting those good ole' American Assets?
from the movie Risky Business:
"...seems to me if there were any logic to our language...TRUST would be a Four Letter Word!"
Right on target, Mixed Bag! Great post!
Where is the outrage from the vocal left wing? hello..., hello... anybody there?
@ Alan --
Get over it, Alan. I am NOT defending President Obama. If anything, this illustrates once again how he tries to act too much like Republicans.
Can't you see that, even if you look at this as a failure of oversight, this is a clear failure of the CONSERVATIVE approach to regulation, not the liberal approach?
Or were you going to propose that Elizabeth Warren be hired to oversee all future federal lending to small businesses?
Or were you going to propose that we end all lending to small businesses entirely?
As for not being a case of the private sector screwing up, did Solyndra have any responsibility for itself or not?
Or are you just another conservative that wants government to protect you from yourself?
I don't think so. As I mentioned to you the other day, the report I read seems to suggest that there will be sufficient private capitalization -- more than a billion dollars as I recall it -- to repay the government loan in the bankruptcy proceedings.
In other words, it is entirely possible that taxpayers will not lose dime one, and all the risk will be borne by the private sector, which is what you conservatives always say you want.
On those days when it's expedient to say it.
Shiny object, shiny object.
________________________________________
AM: you are starting to sound like the Nasty Redhead and that would be very sad in my opinion.
Can't you see that, even if you look at this as a failure of oversight, this is a clear failure of the CONSERVATIVE approach to regulation, not the liberal approach?
_________________________________________________
Sorry, AM, the failure here that is costing taxpayers half a billion is not the failure of the govt to regulate Solyndra. The failure that is costing taxpayers half a billion is the failure of Barry's political hacks to let the DOE staff do its job in the loan approval process for the sake of a political photo op.
You know that's a lose, lose for me, but since you didn't intend it as a compliment, then the fact that you would think it is very sad, in my opinion.
I have nothing but respect for you no matter what nonsense you post. ;-)
Your entire second post ignores the entire point of mine and just rehashes the same tired conservative arguments about how we hate government regulation -- that is, until it fails, and then why didn't you save us from ourselves.
Sigh.
And I stand by what I said about the shiny object.
@AM
The only conclusion I take from this is that divided government is the only safe government. You can bet that if there was a Democratic House this would be swept under the carpet (as would Fast and Furious), just as an untold number of scandals were ignored by the Republican Congress during the Bush Administration.
but since you didn't intend it as a compliment
_______________________________________
I intended it to be a sincere expression of my opinion.
On your second point: Maybe we just have to agree to disagree. You believe it was a govt regulatory failure, I believe it was a White House political failure.
AM-
It's my understanding that, in negotiations concluded last January, the government largely agreed to be indemnified for losses at Solyndra only after the private investors were paid.
From Bloomberg's Jim Snyder and Christopher Martin, Sep 12, 2011:
"In what turned out to be a final effort to save the company, the Energy Department agreed to take a back seat to funds from new investors to keep the solar plant operating...Under the terms, $75 million in private financing will be paid ahead of all but $150 million of the federal government's stake from any revenues from the sale of the company or its assets if Solyndra is liquidated...The government loaned about $527 million to the company by the time it shut down."
Recovery of the federal government's investment in Solyndra does not appear to be assured at all, AM.
In typical fashion, the right tells the left what they should be outraged by while the left tells the right what they should be outraged by.
If my friends on the right had been as vigilant when "w" was running our country into the ground, instead of looking the other way, we would be a lot better of today no matter who was president.
If my friends on the left used the same laser-like focus and critical eye on This President as they did on his predecessor, we would be a lot better of than we are today.
You're both hypocrites who never fail to see the speck in your opponents eye while ignoring the log in your own until it's too late.
(oh, and I'm using the term "friends" loosely)
Corruption, incompetence, malfeasance, etc. know no party or ideology, but party members and ideologues
can only see it when it occurs on the other side...
If any part of that was directed at me, I fear you missed my point...friend (lol).
Everyone, regardless of political ideology, should be upset about the circumstances surrounding the collapse of Solyndra.
It represents the failure of a lot more than just another unsustainable start-up business, df.
MB-
If you haven't seen my own postings on this topic, please take a look. The video from PBS of the President at Solyndra that I posted WILL be a campaign ad for whoever his opponent is in the general election.
As I am (as is my wont, and the wellspring of my popularity) chiding the LEFT and the RIGHT here for their collective ideological "BLINDERS" you may feel free to include yourself if you feel the shoe fits.
Keeping with the same imagery; It is really funny when that proverbial "shoe" is on the other foot, and that is my point my friend;
It's always different when the shoe is on the other foot...
(I know I'm on the right track when a post gets no votes; Like Chris Rock when he tells a joke;
1/3 laugh
1/3 boo
1/3 sit in stunned silence)
Yea, Anna, that is why President Bush put the breaks on this before he left office. The saw this was a problem and stopped it.
MB_
I wholeheartedly agree with your statement
Everyone, regardless of political ideology, should be upset about the circumstances surrounding________________
Let's see how others would fill in the blank...
_____________________________________________________________________________
Va Ind
Yea, Anna, that is why President Bush put the breaks on this before he left office. The saw this was a problem and stopped it.
Actually, The Bush program was underfunded, so while they were being considered, there was no way they could have received funds that didn't exist.
It's all posted here if you took the time to read...
Well, dangerfield, about the ONLY president I did not believe capable of corruption was Carter.
Inept, incompetent? Sure. Corrupt? Did not seem to fit. In fact, I think he suffered from a little bit of scrupulosity.
So, when he was accused of malfeasance for making campaign calls from the White House domestic quarters, I concluded that if there was something unethical about that, he was unaware of the regulation. (turned out the accusers were wrong- there is a specific exemption).
He's the only exception I make- only because even after I lost faith in his ability to successfully govern, I did not change my opinion of who he was as a human.
Does that make me naive? Maybe. Hypocritical? I don't think so.
That said- the corrupt misuse of taxpayer funds is something I condemn no matter who is in charge of the payola.
This entire travesty needs to be looked at by a special prosecutor- Solyndra, Evergreen, 13G, Tesla, Fisk automotive. . .
Thanks for being so inclusive, df.
Hope you won't mind if I decline your generous offer.
I only asked the question because I believe I raised the issue of the lack of outrage from the left about Solyndra...both here at First Read, and among Democratic lawmakers.
I may not be up to date, but I only heard Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Rep. DeGette (D-CO) raise their voices on the matter ahead of Congressional hearings. Ultimately, when government funding for "green" energy projects is curtailed or delayed indefinitely, perhaps they'll be more concern from progressives about Solyndra...perhaps not.
Anyway, I'm afraid I'm not nearly so inclusive.
Despite your clear liberal lean, I never toss you in with the "usual suspects"...that would be absurd. And, I've seen what you've posted on Solyndra. The PBS transcript was particularly informative, for anyone wanting to know more.
So, I doubt that many bothered to read it.
You're talking about $75 million of new money, added late in an attempt to save the project. The entire private capitalization of Solyndra was something like $1.2 billion, as previously reported by CNN Money. So that particular deal doesn't necessarily prove that the government will lose its investment, but only that the government would be subordinate to that portion of the capitalization.
That restructuring was good money after bad, and we had to agreemto take lastmplace in line to get more money out of Kaiser, et als.
http://swampland.time.com/2011/09/03/big-name-investors-to-recoup-losses-before-taxpayers-in-obamas-failed-green-tech-bet/
Nice spin, AM, but no a,out of pain is going to change the facts-
Obama paid back a big dollar donor, and the taxpayers got screwed.
no joe-
I don't think President Obama is corrupt. As I've said, that's simply not my take on him.
Were some of the Energy Dept. folks involved with Solyndra corrupt?
Possibly. The link between one of Solyndra's chief investors and the bundling of campaign contributions for the '08 Obama campaign is troubling.
Mostly what I see here is ideology, in the form of a philosophical commitment to "green" energy, interfering with sound judgment where the risks involved to taxpayer funding of Solyndra was concerned...risks that were glaringly obvious to at least some OMB and Energy Dept. officials, not to mention at least one independent auditor.
In any event, allowing ideological bias to interfere with sound judgment isn't a practice confined to those on the left.
I would hope that a special prosecutor isn't necessary to address what occurred with Solyndra.
We have laws, already on the books, for dealing with any corruption that might be involved here. Enforce those before wasting time and money on the circus that always...ALWAYS...accompanies the appointment of a special prosecutor.
In any event, allowing ideological bias to interfere with sound judgment isn't a practice confined to those on the left.
(That was sort of my point...)
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
That a zero-voter if ever i read one...and forgive me but,
Great post!
:P
I agree. Pretty fair and balanced there Mixed Bag, you must have watched Fox.
Edit:
Hey who else clicked it!
Sorry, Mixed Bag, on this we have to agree to disagree. Read the iWatch story on this- and other questionable uses of taxpayer funds.
Heck, read this
http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/181731-report-white-house-pressured-general-to-support-lightsquared
There are WAAAY too many coincidences for all of this to be, well, coincidental.
The common thread is "big dollar donors".
Anna Molly-
According to Bloomberg's reporting, if Solyndra failed (as outlined in a government document detailing $75 million in new private investment as part of a last-ditch effort to save the company last January) and it was sold or its assets liquidated, the federal government is guaranteed nothing beyond $150 million on its $527 million investment.
Have I got that wrong?
Are you really arguing that the federal government is guaranteed full repayment of the money it loaned to Solyndra?
And, are you also suggesting that the bulk of the $1.2 billion in private capital sunk into Solyndra remains intact, wasn't burned up in the company's death spiral, and thus remains available for repaying the federal government?
Did CNN Money have access to the text of the January agreement regarding Solyndra that Bloomberg has been reporting on?
no joe-
We've disagreed before. I doubt that this'll be the last time.
We both have strong opinions, so it's to be expected
I'm not arguing that there was no corruption, of any kind, involved in the collapse of Solyndra.
But, I don't see President Obama as being a party to this kind of corruption at all.
It might actually be better if he had...because, the alternative explanation is just as bad, maybe even worse.
The President was lauding Solyndra's bright prospects only two months after auditor PricewaterhouseCoopers was questioning its ability to continue operation. Does anyone really believe that President Obama was stupid enough to do that...knowing that the company was likely headed for bankruptcy?
I don't believe he knew the trouble Solyndra was in.
If that's true, he certainly isn't being well served by those he's appointed to the highest levels of government, is he?
Well, I guess I'm in the position of giving the man more credit than are you, MB.
Hmmm, what's worse? Corrupt- or totally clueless?
Six of one. . .
Point taken.
Probably not. I was in a hurry and didn't read the whole thing.
This was what I read. See what you think it says.
http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/09/technology/solyndra_fbi/index.htm
That doesn't seem to rule out the possibility that taxpayers won't lose anything of the Chapter 11 restructuring is successful. Even in the "worst case scenario," the government will get some money back. That's where the heavy private capitalization of Solyndra, which according to the article was already over $600 million when the federal government approved the loan, and I read elsewhere was ultimately in the neighborhood of $1.2 billion, will play a role.
But getting back even $150 million out of $500 million may look better to you when you read how much Rick Perry is getting back for Texas from his bad deals involving his own campaign contributors.
http://swampland.time.com/2011/06/27/the-cracks-in-rick-perrys-job-growth-record/
So tell me, what does all of this prove beyond the fact -- already known by most of us -- that politicians on both sides of the aisle are corrupted by campaign donations -- one of the reasons I have ALWAYS favored public campaign finance -- and they sometimes make bad deals involving our money?
Oh, I know, it tells us we need MORE oversight over government loans to business, not less.
Frankly, I don't know what your real agenda has been in trying to make me look ignorant and foolish, Bag Boy. Other than to incite your little cadre of followers, perhaps, and encourage them to ridicule me as well.
I hope it makes you feel better because there has to be some way to balance out the way it makes me feel.
In that connection, I do take some consolation in knowing that there ARE rational economic minds who agree with my take on this. Perhaps you would do well to read what some of them say before you go out of your way the next time to repeatedly ridicule me.
Here's one now for you to start with:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/toddwoody/2011/09/08/solyndra-raid-is-failure-a-crime/
Later, boys.
Two more points about Solyndra and then I'll have done. I'm going out of town, so I may not be back at First Read for a couple of weeks, at least.
First, I don't believe I ever said that the federal government would get all its money back.
And second, I've recently witnessed firsthand in another context the exact kind of puffery that Solyndra is being accused of when it was trying to raise additional capital. My situation involved a CFO whose job was on the line if he couldn't get financing, and he made a few warranties and representations during a financing round that later turned out to have been exaggerated, to say the least. In that case, no federal dollars were at issue and no government officials involved. It's only anecdotal, but then so is the Solyndra story. I suspect, however, that you might find this kind of puffery to be common in these cases.
It's why I've always said that the scientists are one thing in these cases, and the financial guys are something else altogether. Financial guys, through mismanagement, have been known to destroy the hopes of both scientists and angel investors, and then to walk away, as they usually do, with large severance packages, which they tuck away while they move on down the road to the next target of their expertise.
Don't think for one minute that this kind of mismanagement, if it should prove to be the case, is confined to the Obama administration or to Solyndra.
Have a nice, quiet couple of weeks without me.
AM...
Enjoy the sojourn.
I've got to tell you, what worries me most about the whole Solyndra thing is the President's remarks about Solyndra, and its future, at the company's solar panel plant in May, 2010...two months after auditor PricewaterhouseCoopers expressed doubts that the company was sound enough to remain in business.
President Obama doesn't strike me as particularly cynical...this is, after all, the "Hope And Change" guy.
It would have been very, very cynical to choose Solyndra as an example of the Administration's policy of promoting and supporting companies producing "green" energy products and technology if he had known Solyndra was in danger of bankruptcy.
I don't think he knew, AM.
That's bad.
.
Of course... we should all just ignore the corruption in the White House!
Nothing to see here folks...just another Rove-esque maneuver to distract Americans from the failure that is the Republican controlled House...which, by the way, has not produced a single job since they took over back in January...didn't they say, vote us in and our #1 focus will be job creation? Well...Speaker, where are the jobs?
That's right Pat...
Keep focusing on one thing at a time... (typical liberal... unable to multitask).
Meanwhile, the rest of us will continue to work on a way to help our economy (in spite of the democratic resistance) and focus on the corruption in the White House. (Barry's gonna get caught with his pants down on this one LOL!)
LMAO.....nothing there....yeah right ...ignorance or denial ???? The WH rushed the $528 Million for anObama and Biden photo opps......Hell even Bush would not loan them money. Soyndra's CEO visited the WH 16 times in the months prior to getting loan approval........16 times !!!! Half a Billion dollars from taxpayers, one year later bankrupt, FBI raids their HQ and takes files and computers......and you say nothing there.
The only thing stopping Bush from loaning them the money was that Bernanke had taken away the Chinese Express Card at that point.
Your opinion, Clara... since you don't have any proof of what Bush's motivation was for withholding the loan.
NOW....
The FACTS are that Bush did NOT lend them the money and Obama DID!
(stick that in your liberal pipe and smoke it!)
SickOfTheBickering
(Barry's gonna get caught with his pants down on this one LOL!)
This why the current crop of Republicans & Tea Baggers are thought to be FREAKS.
Obama has been caught with his pants down.........he and Biden both.....along with the incompetent head of Dept of Energy that Obama appointed...,.....wonder if he was one of those Recess appointments he forced through ???????
Now another example has appeared.......Google Adm. Sheridan and read how he was advised to slant his testimony so new technology would appear to be more efficient than it actually is so it could get military approval.....owner of Company is big DNC supporter/donor.
xx
sickofthebickering, it's your kind of games that the government is so proud of. You are just so fed up with the corrupt DEMOCRATS that have squandered $500 million now but ok'ed the corrupt REPUBLICANS "misplacing" $9 billion in Iraq or Haliburton overcharging for services due to "calculation" error. Yeah man, the gummint loves people like you.
REALLY? Are you a mind reader there king?
You can somehow speak accurately on the subject of what I am thinking regarding Iraq... even without my saying a word on that subject? REALLY?
WOW! You are amazing man!
No, I'm just speaking on the things you have posted, for all to read.
Wow...so much vitriol from the Righties.
Yet, it seems they had no problem with all the money that was given to no-bid contracts in Iraq for Halliburton and Blackwater Security.
You all should take a deep breath and check out Bloomberg News. Solyndra went under because they could not get their new technology to market fast enough or cheap enough, BECAUSE the CHINESE are so far ahead of the US that even though they are using older technology, they can undercut our prices to the decree that newer technology just cannot compete. But this is EXACTLY where the public-private partnership is needed - to foster new but not yet profitable technologies. Venture capitalists serve the same function - they lose a lot of money with the hope of hitting a home run.
Here's the source...
www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-06/solyndra-solar-panel-maker-in-california-files-for-bankruptcy-protection.html
and all this was known before hand and warned against........info just didn't appear over night..........but the Dept of energy and WH pushed it through any how for a great "Green" jobs photo Opp......
Venture capitalist are RESPONSIBLE and have a Fiduciary responsibility over the money they invest for clients.......Ideology and photo opps don't create ROI.........Dept of Energy and WH acted ilresponsibly.
...and I have to ask.
Are the shenanigans that the Conservatives are accusing the White House and Solyndra of committing enough for them to see why the Citizens United decision by the SCOTUS was such a bad idea?
If it's not, then sadly they'll never get it.
da Noid, you have no clue. This has absolutely nothing to do with the Citizens United decision; liberal attempts to destroy the First Amendment only hurt attempts to keep government honest.
You are sadly mistaken, Bob. Based on the accusations being thrown around above, I'd suggest that the decision in Citizens United has a lot more to do with this than you think.
Don't worry, I won't leave you hanging on this but I won't give you the answer yet simply because I'm interested to see if anyone is smart enough to figure out what the connection is on their own.
Enron, cough
Enron was another example of phony alternative energy, crony capitalism, "public private" partnership.
Ask Paul Krugman, Enron 'consultant" about that...
Wasn't Senator Phil GRAMM's wife (R) on the board of ENRON? They were a energy market maker, whose entire profitability model was based on an accounting trick, loopholed into the tax code called MARK-to-MARKET. It was legalized FRAUD, permitted for "KennyBOY" Lay, by George "W" BUSH.
This has BO stink all over it! Its time to grill BO and his cronnies to find out WHAT DID THEY KNOW AND WHEN DID THEY KNOW IT! If its what I suspect, Impeachment is coming soon!
...and, pray tell, what do you suspect it to be?
Well DE Noid, you seem to be a liberal genius. You figure it out!
What, you want me to read your mind and figure out what you're thinking?
Sorry...strong am I with The Force, but not that strong.
Now I hear that the BO's "green plan" has blown over 20 BILLION STIMULUS DOLLARS!That works out to over 5 Million for each of the 3500 jobs they claim it created. Folks, we are in a world of hurt with this socialist dumbass in office. There should be a investigation in BO and his cronnies. There is BO stink all over this Disgrace!
What really reeks is the way so many liberal lemming on FR blindly defend Prez-0. He is the one who has appointed idiots (like AG Holden) to run his circus.
They refuse to admit they voted for/elected a DOFUS.
Am I the only one who sees that while everyone seems fond of lobbing grenades at the fossil fuel companies and suppliers, nobody sees that this whole "green movement" will just create a new class of robber barons, the ones who weren't there to get in the ground floor with other energy sources. Of course they want fossil fuel to be grossly expensive, because the alternatives are not well thought out, tested, mass marketable, and as such, are also grossly expensive. It is just a difference in whose pockets will be padded. Many of the supposed "green" industries which were given financial assistance from our government seem to have failed, and in a very short period of time too. Where exactly did all this money go? Where are all the "green jobs" that were supposed to result from fostering this technology? Seems that a very few at the top have reaped the benefits of stimulus, and the working guy is plumb out of luck...Surprise!!!!!!!
Al Gore has probably made tens of millions off of it...
...and has a carbon footprint bigger then most 3rd world nations too.
If he has purchased carbon offsets to sequester carbon, then his footprint could very well be zero. It's not a matter of how much carbon you place into the environment alone, it is also a matter of how much you have paid to have removed.
Paul, the 'carbon offset' speil is total, complete BS and anyone with any sense knows it.
How so? Carbon sequestration is taking place every day. Are you unaware of this?
Carbon sequestration is the capture & storage of carbon.
Carbon offset is 'I can use more if you use less'
two different things.
...and how often do you bike to work?
Carbon offsets and carbon offset credits are what create the market for carbon sequestration being funded.