http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=298&articleid=20110830_298_0_Adayaf338975
Wow, that hardly left them time to round up all the homeless like they did in the past.
Curious if classless thugs will be lining the route flipping him off like they did when Cheney came to town several years ago.
Quote from: Conan71 on August 30, 2011, 02:29:40 PM
Curious if classless thugs will be lining the route flipping him off like they did when Cheney came to town several years ago.
Cheney started it.
Quote from: Conan71 on August 30, 2011, 02:29:40 PM
Curious if classless thugs will be lining the route flipping him off like they did when Cheney came to town several years ago.
LOL...classless thugs like Col. Wilkerson?
Ex-Bush Official Col. Lawrence Wilkerson: "I am Willing to Testify" If Dick Cheney is Put on Trial
http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/658901/ex-bush_official_col._lawrence_wilkerson%3A_%22i_am_willing_to_testify%22_if_dick_cheney_is_put_on_trial/
This veep is a good Joe and not a Dick....
Quote from: Teatownclown on August 30, 2011, 02:49:00 PM
This veep is a good Joe and not a Dick....
He's a special little guy
You should see the motorcade going through town right now. Dear Lord....there's no chance anyone will be able to flip him off, or get within a block of him.
Nice of them to schedule this right in the middle of the Tulsa rush hour.
FWIW, do the hosts of fund-raisers like this pay for the fuel, security detail, and other attendant costs associated with trips like this?
I'm not asking in a partisan manner, I simply want to know if tax payers are on the hook for fund-raising junkets like this and all the additional headaches they cause.
Were they travelling South down Boston then East on 15th around 4:30 on Tour busses? Or maybe those were just guests. I thought man, wait till they try to slip those buses through Cherry street.
No, they had a motorcade of Suburbans, Cadillacs, and police at about 5:30.
I wonder who's home the event was held?
Quote from: ZYX on August 30, 2011, 08:49:33 PM
No, they had a motorcade of Suburbans, Cadillacs, and police at about 5:30.
And Ambulance as well as a Fire Truck......
Nope, Dr Stephen Adelson.
Nah, he came to visit me but got lost in Swan Lake and ended up by the Braums at 28th & Harvard.
Quote from: AquaMan on August 31, 2011, 09:19:58 AM
Nah, he came to visit me but got lost in Swan Lake and ended up by the Braums at 28th & Harvard.
Did he tell the cashier to go $%^& off?
Quote from: rdj on August 31, 2011, 08:12:55 AM
Nope, Dr Stephen Adelson.
They had a brief shot of the motorcade pulling up in front of some residences and it looked like the Adelson's block. As well, a "Tom" who had been at the fund raiser was in a sound bite on KRMG this morning. Sure sounded a lot like Tom Adelson.
The Braum's clerk told him to get a real job.
He probably met with a small group of true blue Tulsans that included Taylor, Adelson, Kaiser, et al. Hope he spent some money while here.
Quote from: AquaMan on August 31, 2011, 10:24:53 AM
The Braum's clerk told him to get a real job.
He probably met with a small group of true blue Tulsans that included Taylor, Adelson, Kaiser, et al. Hope he spent some money while here.
He COLLECTED money while here. ::)
Quote from: AngieBrumley on August 31, 2011, 12:34:48 PM
He COLLECTED money while here. ::)
Well. . .I know he drove by Kathy Taylor's house, perhaps to pick up a check?
I just found out from an unlikely fly on the wall that Vice President Biden's meeting with George Kaiser had more to do with a company called Solyndra, and less to do with fundraising.
Apparently, we may be seeing Mr. Kaiser testifying before congress soon.
Quote from: Gaspar on September 01, 2011, 12:25:08 PM
I just found out from an unlikely fly on the wall that Vice President Biden's meeting with George Kaiser had more to do with a company called Solyndra, and less to do with fundraising.
Apparently, we may be seeing Mr. Kaiser testifying before congress soon.
What part did Kaiser play in it?
"Solyndra's bankruptcy reveals the failure of Obama administration's energy program, which promoted the loan guarantee, whose first recipient was a startup company in the solar industry - Solyndra.
"This is really bad news.... Half a billion dollars of taxpayer money and we may end up holding the bag," House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) told ABC News. "This is just a classic case of fraud and abuse and waste."
The "Solyndra Effect," one clean-tech investor said, now refers to the chill sent down the spines of potential limited partners of venture capital funds by the massive writedowns experienced by investors in the solar company, reports The Wall Street Journal.
Solyndra will be the third solar company to file bankruptcy protection in August, following Spectrawatt Inc. and Evergreen Solar Inc."
http://newyork.ibtimes.com/articles/207188/20110901/solyndra-bankruptcy-news-solar-panel-doe-omb.htm
Video on local news looked like motorcade pulled in to the ex-mayor's house.
Washington Post article discusses Kaiser's involvement in Solyndra.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/solyndra-solar-company-fails-after-getting-controversial-federal-loan-guarantees/2011/08/31/gIQAB8IRsJ_story.html
Quote from: Conan71 on September 01, 2011, 12:41:06 PM
"This is really bad news.... Half a billion dollars of taxpayer money and we may end up holding the bag, "House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) told ABC News. "This is just a classic case of fraud and abuse and waste."
I'm going to suggest that House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) brought the idea to the table and is now CYA'ing. I have no proof. It just wouldn't shock me.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 01, 2011, 12:41:06 PM
What part did Kaiser play in it?
"Solyndra's bankruptcy reveals the failure of Obama administration's energy program, which promoted the loan guarantee, whose first recipient was a startup company in the solar industry - Solyndra.
"This is really bad news.... Half a billion dollars of taxpayer money and we may end up holding the bag," House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) told ABC News. "This is just a classic case of fraud and abuse and waste."
The "Solyndra Effect," one clean-tech investor said, now refers to the chill sent down the spines of potential limited partners of venture capital funds by the massive writedowns experienced by investors in the solar company, reports The Wall Street Journal.
Solyndra will be the third solar company to file bankruptcy protection in August, following Spectrawatt Inc. and Evergreen Solar Inc."
http://newyork.ibtimes.com/articles/207188/20110901/solyndra-bankruptcy-news-solar-panel-doe-omb.htm
But, but, they promised all these jobs created by green energy companies!!!!!!!!
Quote from: Gaspar on September 01, 2011, 12:25:08 PM
I just found out from an unlikely fly on the wall that Vice President Biden's meeting with George Kaiser had more to do with a company called Solyndra, and less to do with fundraising.
Apparently, we may be seeing Mr. Kaiser testifying before congress soon.
Is Kaiser involved with any of these?
QuoteSolyndra also received some $1 billion in venture capital funds from investors including CMEA Ventures, Argonaut Ventures, Madrone Partners, Redpoint Ventures, funds affiliated with RockPort Capital Partners, and U.S. Venture Partners
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/01/us-solyndra-idUSTRE77U5K420110901 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/01/us-solyndra-idUSTRE77U5K420110901)
That could explain some of what you heard.
There has been an increase in solar power plant proposals in the last few years.
Quote from: dbacks fan on September 01, 2011, 12:50:39 PM
But, but, they promised all these jobs created by green energy companies!!!!!!!!
As commented on repeatedly here - those jobs were lost over the last 30 years to Germany and the Pacific Rim, especially China. Duh!!
The US gubmint also got into Solyndra for some, too.
First Solar is last man standing here. Perrysburg, OH is where they do at least some, if not all, of their manufacturing.
We missed the boat for large scale manufacturing in this country. We can and are capturing at least some of the market for installation/service.
As far as money invested, well I submit...again...that ANY spending/subsidy like this beats the $1.2 trillion Bush gave to his banker and insurance buddies. Come back when it gets close to a trillion, and we can talk again.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on September 01, 2011, 01:08:12 PM
As commented on repeatedly here - those jobs were lost over the last 30 years to Germany and the Pacific Rim, especially China. Duh!!
The US gubmint also got into Solyndra for some, too.
First Solar is last man standing here. Perrysburg, OH is where they do at least some, if not all, of their manufacturing.
We missed the boat for large scale manufacturing in this country. We can and are capturing at least some of the market for installation/service.
As far as money invested, well I submit...again...that ANY spending/subsidy like this beats the $1.2 trillion Bush gave to his banker and insurance buddies. Come back when it gets close to a trillion, and we can talk again.
First Solar is building a plant in Mesa, AZ that will have the potential to employ up to 5,000 at build out.
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/local/mesa/article_09816c14-50c2-11e0-9756-001cc4c002e0.html (http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/local/mesa/article_09816c14-50c2-11e0-9756-001cc4c002e0.html)
Quote from: dbacks fan on September 01, 2011, 12:55:12 PM
Is Kaiser involved with any of these?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/01/us-solyndra-idUSTRE77U5K420110901 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/01/us-solyndra-idUSTRE77U5K420110901)
That could explain some of what you heard.
Allegedly. . .many of the loan documents required by law do not exist. . . and the e-mail communications between the company, and the White House have also gone missing.
The company was loaned 500 Million dollars backed by George Kaiser, days after Price Waterhouse issued a warning that the company may not be solvent. If the company was allowed, through political influence, to bypass regulations and skip the application process for the sake of quick PR, this will end up being a big deal because it cost half a billion dollars and thousands of jobs. This would represent a significant felonious act, and anyone with knowledge of it would be accessory.
Stock holders are now demanding investigations into Evergreen Solar (of which I owned 500 shares) as well as several other companies that received quick green stimulus cash and then ended up filing for bankruptcy to see if the same application requirements were ignored, therefore artificially inflating the value of the stocks, and industry.
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/obama-administration-solyndra/story?id=13640783
Quote from: Gaspar on September 01, 2011, 01:22:40 PM
Allegedly. . .many of the loan documents required by law do not exist. .
If they don't, they will.
Yeah, these failures, they have nothing to do with the price-per-watt of solar drastically decreasing, it's because of fraud. (I'm not actually saying there's no fraud, because I don't know, what I do know is that even companies like First Solar are having serious troubles because the Chinese are selling panels well below cost for some reason)
Quote from: Townsend on September 01, 2011, 01:26:44 PM
If they don't, they will.
Oh, I am quite sure there will also be suitable scapegoats, I am just hopeful that Mr. Kaiser does not end up being one.
He has done so much for our community, it would be a shame for something like this to fall on him, simply because he chose to associate with a bad crowd.
Slightly OT, I found this article about how wind farm companies are deciding where to place farms in Oregon in relationship to how close they are to a Starbucks.
http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2009/10/testing_the_starbucks_rule_for.html (http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2009/10/testing_the_starbucks_rule_for.html)
Quote from: Townsend on September 01, 2011, 12:45:00 PM
I'm going to suggest that House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) brought the idea to the table and is now CYA'ing. I have no proof. It just wouldn't shock me.
Doubtful. Cong. Upton wasn't Chairman when this deal went down (at the time he was the Ranking member because the Republicans were in the minority) and a Michigan Congressman would not have pushed to get a federal loan guaranty for a California company.
Quote from: DTowner on September 01, 2011, 04:25:00 PM
Doubtful. Cong. Upton wasn't Chairman when this deal went down (at the time he was the Ranking member because the Republicans were in the minority) and a Michigan Congressman would not have pushed to get a federal loan guaranty for a California company.
Shhhh, roll with it. I'm trying to make it a rumor which could make it a story.
Quote from: Gaspar on September 01, 2011, 01:44:34 PM
Oh, I am quite sure there will also be suitable scapegoats, I am just hopeful that Mr. Kaiser does not end up being one.
He has done so much for our community, it would be a shame for something like this to fall on him, simply because he chose to associate with a bad crowd.
I agree.
GK is too smart and good for this but conspiracy experts might wonder if this was a corporate welfare/favor type arrangement? GK wouldn't get involved unless it was a "no lose" transaction. Many a great company has evolved by protecting themselves from creditors. Many a great capitalist has used loses to offset gains.
Quote from: Teatownclown on September 01, 2011, 04:59:27 PM
I agree.
GK is too smart and good for this but conspiracy experts might wonder if this was a corporate welfare/favor type arrangement? GK wouldn't get involved unless it was a "no lose" transaction. Many a great company has evolved by protecting themselves from creditors. Many a great capitalist has used loses to offset gains.
GK has been pretty careful which pocket funds which project. In his heart, I'm sure he thinks he's backing the right horse, but he expects to be repaid even when he picks a loser, like Great Plains.
The national media has begun its focus on him now.
George Kaiser, who has in the past been labeled a major Solyndra investor as well as a Obama donor, made three visits to the White House on March 12, 2009, and one on March 13. Kaiser has denied any direct involvement in the Solyndra deal and through a statement from his foundation said he "did not participate in any discussions with the U.S. government regarding the loan."
But the countless meetings at the White House seem hardly coincidental. Kaiser, in fact, is responsible for 16 of the 20 meetings that showed up on the White House logs.
In the meetings on March 12, Kaiser met with former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors Austan Goolsbee at 11 a.m., Senior Advisor Pete Rouse at 3 p.m., and Deputy Director of the Domestic Policy Council Heather Higginbottom at 6:30 p.m. On the 13th, Kaiser met with Deputy Director of the National Economic Council Jason Furman at 9 a.m.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/08/solyndra-officials-made-numerous-trips-to-the-white-house-logs-show/#ixzz1XO44tznD
Quote from: Gaspar on September 08, 2011, 01:31:33 PM
The national media has begun its focus on him now.
The Daily Caller?
Does it matter? BTW, the FBI just raided the Solyndra offices today. This is not looking good.
FYI, also reported on ABC, NBC, FOX, LA Times, BusinessWeek and the Christian Science Monitor.
Thank god Biden is gone the cumulative IQ is back up where it was.....
So Price Waterhouse indicated the company may be insolvent, then Mr. Kaiser's foundation gave millions to a company called Argonaut Ventures that invested that money in the failing solar company so that it could continue to operate. Then Mr.Kaiser had a series of meetings at the White House. One week later the Administration gave the company over $500 billion in stimulus money. Then, facing imminent failure, Solyndra and Argonaut Ventures reorganized the company's debts, putting the U.S. loan behind the money owed to Argonaut Ventures.
How do you do that? How do you put the investors of a failing company before it's largest creditor?
Who the heck is Argonaut Ventures?
http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/science-and-not/what-if-solar-energy-received-.html
What if solar energy received the same subsidies as fossil fuels?
I'd really be wondering if GK invested in the failed idea of wind power....and to think they want to do that adjacent to the Tall Grass Prarie Preserve is criminal...
Quote from: Teatownclown on September 09, 2011, 10:23:05 AM
http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/science-and-not/what-if-solar-energy-received-.html
What if solar energy received the same subsidies as fossil fuels?
I'd really be wondering if GK invested in the failed idea of wind power....and to think they want to do that adjacent to the Tall Grass Prarie Preserve is criminal...
I love it!
"Don't drill in my back yard!"
"Don't erect windmills in my back yard!"
"Don't put in solar farms in my back yard!"
"Hey! Who turned out the bucking lights?"
From what I heard on NPR, the product this solar company was trying to produce was about 10 times (per the amount of energy) what other solar power products cost. That, after they had been working hard to figure out ways to scale up and reduce the costs. At best some estimate that, under the optimal scenario, they could have "perhaps" gotten the costs down to 3 times what solar panels are going for (and they knew those prices had been declining and were going to keep decreasing all the time and thus they would have to keep moving their products pricing down). So, no real way you could even be partly sure that this company could ever make a go of it.
The product may have "worked",,, but apparently it was never shown that it could have worked competitively.
I don't get why either Kaiser or the government put a dime into this company? Apparently no business plan that could show a way to produce a competitively priced product. And no positive sales record. Far as I can tell, they never sold one thing at a profit,,, ever! Would you invest 500mill in that? What were they thinking? There has to be some part of the story I am missing.
The only thing I can think of was that it was a combo of the company over estimating/promising that they could get the costs down, meanwhile (via China and for other reasons), the competing products prices were dropping like a rock, and then there came a point where it became obvious there was no way they could even pretend they could catch up.
It MAY have been able to have worked on paper at one time, but it still looks far too shaky an investment for the government, or even Kaiser, to have invested in. But I do have hindsight going in my favor.
TA, it's called research. You develop a technology, figure out what you think the limits of said technology will be, then go shopping for investors to help you develop it and hope your estimates were correct so you don't get crushed by cheaper alternatives. (even an inferior technology will win most times over a better product with higher up-front cost)
It doesn't help that the Chinese companies are selling below cost right now because it's the only way to make their gigantic volume commitments with the silicon ingot manufacturers. The contracts are structured such that it would be more expensive to miss the target than what they're doing now.
Artist, don't forget that it also fit the political agenda this administration promised to get the green vote. Now, the implication that this directly may have benefitted a big Democrat bundler doesn't look too good. It certainly removes a lot of the image of altruism in the government investment in alt energy.
Looks to me like someone messed up the paper work and failed to get a "take out" agreement ( removing those with exposure to liability) forcing this company to declare bankruptcy as funding was cut off.
There will be resurrection and do not be surprised if the company becomes successful.
Quote from: Teatownclown on September 09, 2011, 12:30:22 PM
Looks to me like someone messed up the paper work and failed to get a "take out" agreement ( removing those with exposure to liability) forcing this company to declare bankruptcy as funding was cut off.
There will be resurrection and do not be surprised if the company becomes successful.
I think perhaps the reason they went bankrupt is that they failed to sell anything.
Just a hunch.
Quote from: Gaspar on September 09, 2011, 12:33:10 PM
I think perhaps the reason they went bankrupt is that they failed to sell anything.
Just a hunch.
And key players who might feel some heat with the government over this could be motivated to pump a bunch more money into this losing horse to stay out of trouble. Or pump enough in to suddenly pay back all those government funds.
Ahahhhhh
Argonaut was founded here in Tulsa in 2002 as a private investment firm for the Kaiser family. It includes realty, venture capital, equity, hospitality, and even insurance ventures for the family.
Today's story on ABC
Beginning in March, ABC News, in partnership with iWatch News/the Center for Public Integrity, was first to report on simmering questions about the role political influence may have played Solyndra's selection as the Obama administration's first loan guarantee recipient. One of the lead private investors in Solyndra was an Oklahoma billionaire who served as an Obama "bundler," raising money during the 2008 presidential campaign.
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/obama-officials-sat-solyndra-meetings/story?id=14476848
Move along. Nothing to see here because there's not even a hint of corruption. We all know it's only wealthy Repiglicans who do this to the government.
Now if this had been a Republican crony during the Bush years (Kenny Boy anyone?) they would have him spread over the hood of a car right now.
Quote"And as part of the deal, the Energy Department agreed that if the company went bust, private investors could recoup their losses before the government. Republicans in Congress called the investment "a bad bet" and said it "put taxpayers at unnecessary risk."
One of the lead private investors in Solyndra was an Oklahoma billionaire who served as an Obama "bundler," raising money during the 2008 presidential campaign.
The bundler, George Kaiser, has declined to comment. His firm, Argonaut Ventures and its affiliates have been the single largest shareholder of Solyndra, according to SEC filings and other records. The company holds 39 percent of Solyndra's parent company, bankruptcy records filed Tuesday show."
"Under terms of the bankruptcy filing, investors including Argonaut -- which led a $75 million round of financing for Solyndra earlier this year -- will stand in line before the federal government and other creditors to recoup its losses. Energy officials confirmed this arrangement, saying that after private investors including Kaiser recover $75 million, the U.S. government would have a chance to seek $150 million of its investment."
Things are getting weird. On the US Treasury website, I wanted to find out when the last payment to Solyndra was. Turns out it was July for 2.3mil. But then I noticed a history of payments to another group. Big loans, almost $74 million in one month! So I looked them up. Turns out it's 8 different companies that share a single office in Oakland California. Solar Partners I through Solar Partners VIII. Their office also happens to be the exact same office suite as Tetra Tech, an environmental consulting firm receiving funds. All eight of these companies are owned by Tetra Tech. You may remember who Tetra Tech is, they are another environmental consulting firm touted during the Obama campaign, and already the recipient of millions of dollars for emissions research money.
Not sure why they've created 8 additional companies to receive federal funds but you can bet there's a big doner behind this one too.
DOE-SECTION 1705 (RECOVERY)
Great Basin Transmission 6/01 $5,643,344.94 9/28/40 4.075% Qtr.
Solyndra 6/10 $2,356,708.26 8/15/16 1.025% Qtr.
Beacon 6/15 $301,613.65 6/17/30 3.196% Qtr.
Kahuku Wind Power 6/28 $163,366.01 6/28/28 2.958% Qtr.
Kahuku Wind Power 6/28 $893,427.86 6/28/28 2.958% Qtr.
Great Basin Transmission 6/28 $9,150,372.09 9/28/40 4.067% Qtr.
Solar Partners VIII 6/29 $21,890,858.87 10/27/38 4.256% S/A
Solar Partners I 6/29 $16,871,054.56 6/27/14 1.126% S/A
Solar Partners I 6/29 $8,692,598.53 6/27/33 3.991% S/A
Solar Partners II 6/29 $26,582,181.60 3/01/38 4.195% S/A
Beacon 6/30 $790,972.44 6/17/30 3.239% Qtr.
http://www.treasury.gov/ffb/press_releases/2011/07-2011.shtml
Quote from: Conan71 on September 09, 2011, 03:37:08 PM
Now if this had been a Republican crony during the Bush years (Kenny Boy anyone?) they would have him spread over the hood of a car right now.
Actually plenty of folks made it through the Bush years nothing more than some localized PR damage (KBR, Halliburton, Blackwater, etc.) Enron went down for reasons far removed from whether or not they were attached to a Republican President. Fraud, embezzlement, manipulating markets -- all kinds of legit criminal stuff.
Nothing at Solyndra far raises to the level of criminality, but of course that could (will?) change as the details emerge. Is it unsavory? Yep, but living through the Bush Administration did teach me one thing: this is currently the manner in which our government and our economy interface. Also, there is very little on either end of the equation -- from business or from government -- to encourage this system to change. So as it is, we have to live with stinkiness that might encourage a desirable industry to flourish.
(PS. I'm not saying live with blatant criminal acts, but I am saying that things that stink are everpresent and the only methods we have to correct it are the justice system's long, slow, and imperfect prosecutions.)
It is sad that this happens in times of prosperity, but it is even more distasteful when it happens in times of economic peril. You are correct though, government will always serve as an instrument of plunder for some. This is the product of a fat government. No one sees all of the putrid wrangling that takes place under its fat rolls!
Government is about coercion. Limiting government is the single most important instrument for guaranteeing liberty. We're working on a third generation which has little in the way of education about what our Constitution means and why it was written. Thus, we've fallen easy prey to charlatens, quacks, and hustlers. – Dr. Walter Williams
Quote from: Gaspar on September 13, 2011, 04:58:11 PM
We're working on a third generation which has little in the way of education about what our Constitution means and why it was written.
If only your pithy quotes were accurate. I seem to recall being educated on the Constitution, how it came to be (including how it was conceived largely to deal with the problems of the Articles of Confederation) and what the individual delegates thought of its various provisions. In public school, no less. In Arkansas, which was around #48 in education at the time.
The problem with folks like Williams is that they speak of the Constitution as if it is some religious text that sprang forth from the hand of God Himself, when in fact it was a messy compromise between various factions within American society at that time. Flowery prose aside, it's actually a terrible document. It's far too vague to have any teeth. On the other hand, that vagueness is probably why it still stands today, unlike the vast majority of its contemporaries.
TBH, I see the Constitution fetish that many right wingers (and moronic survivalists) have as yet another weapon in their mental arsenal to convince themselves that godless commie liberals are ruining their country. If the only argument you have for your position is an appeal to authority, it's not a very good argument, and is probably a poor position. Jefferson, at least, is probably spinning in his grave at such lacking debate.
Quote from: nathanm on September 13, 2011, 06:52:17 PM
If only your pithy quotes were accurate. I seem to recall being educated on the Constitution, how it came to be (including how it was conceived largely to deal with the problems of the Articles of Confederation) and what the individual delegates thought of its various provisions. In public school, no less. In Arkansas, which was around #48 in education at the time.
The problem with folks like Williams is that they speak of the Constitution as if it is some religious text that sprang forth from the hand of God Himself, when in fact it was a messy compromise between various factions within American society at that time. Flowery prose aside, it's actually a terrible document. It's far too vague to have any teeth. On the other hand, that vagueness is probably why it still stands today, unlike the vast majority of its contemporaries.
In 3 paragraphs you have accurately framed your position on our constitution. Thank you.
TBH, I see the Constitution fetish that many right wingers (and moronic survivalists) have as yet another weapon in their mental arsenal to convince themselves that godless commie liberals are ruining their country. If the only argument you have for your position is an appeal to authority, it's not a very good argument, and is probably a poor position. Jefferson, at least, is probably spinning in his grave at such lacking debate.
Quote from: we vs us on September 13, 2011, 04:45:18 PM
Actually plenty of folks made it through the Bush years nothing more than some localized PR damage (KBR, Halliburton, Blackwater, etc.) Enron went down for reasons far removed from whether or not they were attached to a Republican President. Fraud, embezzlement, manipulating markets -- all kinds of legit criminal stuff.
Nothing at Solyndra far raises to the level of criminality, but of course that could (will?) change as the details emerge. Is it unsavory? Yep, but living through the Bush Administration did teach me one thing: this is currently the manner in which our government and our economy interface. Also, there is very little on either end of the equation -- from business or from government -- to encourage this system to change. So as it is, we have to live with stinkiness that might encourage a desirable industry to flourish.
(PS. I'm not saying live with blatant criminal acts, but I am saying that things that stink are everpresent and the only methods we have to correct it are the justice system's long, slow, and imperfect selective prosecutions.)
If Solyndra cooked the books to show they were solvent enough to warrant further federal funding, then there was a blatant fraud against the government. If the government loaned money to this venture using different criteria (i.e. much more lax profit or investor capitalization requirements) than they would have another venture, or the DOJ refuses to dig deep into this, that smacks of blatant corruption. Obviously, not enough is known at this point to really make an educated judgement.
As far as big collapses, I'm still surprised nothing has ever come of Tom Kivisto and SEM Group. His trading schemes, and those of other speculators had far-reaching negative economic impact on millions, if not billions of people around the world. Perhaps they've not found any SEC violations. Or perhaps, he's made enough contributions here and there to stanch any criminal investigations. At the very least, we should have seen some sort of reforms in commodity trading to keep speculators from controlling the prices in the market-place. I can still see no good reason for oil to be as high as it is right now, and that continues to sap money from other parts of the economy as consumers have to make choices between having transportation or buying durable and consumable goods.
/ramble
Quote from: Conan71 on September 14, 2011, 09:23:05 AM
If Solyndra cooked the books to show they were solvent enough to warrant further federal funding, then there was a blatant fraud against the government. If the government loaned money to this venture using different criteria (i.e. much more lax profit or investor capitalization requirements) than they would have another venture, or the DOJ refuses to dig deep into this, that smacks of blatant corruption. Obviously, not enough is known at this point to really make an educated judgement.
Geez, keep your powder dry on this one, willya? The scandal (such as it currently is) just came out in the last week, and the DOJ is obviously doing some serious digging (FBI raids tends to indicate the level of their intent). So far I'd argue that the government is performing in a sterling manner regarding at least the initial stages.
Just don't fall into the Gaspar trap of searching for the grand conspiracy in every piece of minutiae. It's not evident yet . . .
Quote from: we vs us on September 14, 2011, 09:39:53 AM
Geez, keep your powder dry on this one, willya? The scandal (such as it currently is) just came out in the last week, and the DOJ is obviously doing some serious digging (FBI raids tends to indicate the level of their intent). So far I'd argue that the government is performing in a sterling manner regarding at least the initial stages.
Just don't fall into the Gaspar trap of searching for the grand conspiracy in every piece of minutiae. It's not evident yet . . .
You don't read my writing very well, apparently. I simply mentioned the two most obvious hypotheticals and concluded by saying: "Obviously, not enough is known at this point to really make an educated judgement"
Spring-loaded this morning?
It is now a criminal investigation. There will be a hearing today.
Apparently there were emails showing that the administration was made aware that Solyndra was not a good investment. According to the Post, they have emails from worried analysts to the White House complaining about "rushed approvals" and one warning that "this deal is not ready for prime-time" as well as emails from auditors voicing substantial doubt about Solyndra's solvency before the loan.
There are only two viable reasons that the administration would approve the loan:
1. to satisfy the request of a donor.
2. to satisfy a Public Relations opportunity.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 14, 2011, 09:50:49 AM
Spring-loaded this morning?
Overcaffeinated, and annoyed by conspiracy theorists.
I'll take PR opportunity for $500, Gaspar!
Yes, I'm aware it's Faux, but after reading multiple articles, it summarizes it best:
QuoteBut emails released by the House Energy and Commerce Committee show that the relevant credit committee decided "not to engage in further discussions with Solyndra" in the final days of the Bush administration. After the change in administration, officials restarted the loan review process for Solyndra.
"A half a billion dollars that was not supported in January under the Bush administration was ... conditionally recommended in March," Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, pointed out.
Asked whether political influence played a role in the loan being approved, Silver said, "I don't believe so."
The emails at least show budget analysts felt rushed by the White House to review the loan guarantee in time for an announcement by Vice President Biden in September 2009.
The concerns flared in August 2009, when staff with the Energy Department wrote of a "major outstanding issue," relating to the project's solvency. They noted an estimate said the project would run out of cash in September 2011.
But other administration officials presumed the parent company, as well as private investors, would cushion the project and ensure its completion.
The company filed for bankruptcy this month. The FBI raided the company on Sept. 8.
The House Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing Wednesday is part of a seven-month investigation.
One Republican aide said the emails released as part of that probe show the White House was more concerned with press events surrounding the loan than the soundness of Solyndra. The aide said "corners were cut."
According to the House committee, the average review time for White House budget officials screening Energy Department loan guarantees is 28 calendar days. The committee said that for Solyndra, the first such loan guarantee made by the department, the review took just nine days.
Officials expressed concern about the review process in the run-up to the Biden announcement.
One White House budget official asked that the announcement "be postponed." Another email complained about "rushed approvals," and said "we are worried" about Solyndra. However, the announcement went forward as planned
The emails show White House officials repeatedly checking with the Office of Management and Budget on the progress of its review of the loan ahead of the high-profile groundbreaking for the company's new factory.
One email from a budget official referred to "the time pressure we are under to sign-off on Solyndra."
One exchange showed a budget analyst in March 2009 warning the deal was "not ready for prime time."
But the White House denied that it was trying to influence the result of the financial reviews, and it has defended the federal loan.
"This loan guarantee was pursued by both the Bush and Obama administrations," White House spokesman Eric Schultz said. "The Department of Energy's overall portfolio of investments -- which includes dozens of other companies, continues to perform well and is on pace to create thousands of jobs."
He said private-sector investors, "who put more than $1 billion of their own money on the line," also saw potential in the firm.
Daniel Poneman, deputy secretary of energy, wrote in a USA Today column that "expanding production has coincided with short-term softening demand," suggesting Solyndra was the victim of economic circumstance.
Democratic lawmakers, while raising questions about this particular loan, said it's important to keep funding clean energy projects.
"We are in danger of losing this industry to our competitors, especially China," Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., said.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/14/officials-raised-concerns-solar-firms-solvency-ahead-bankruptcy-emails-show/#ixzz1XwTpZC49
At least as far as removing the U.S. from becoming a dumping ground for cheap Chinese solar panels, tariffs would help. Unfortunately, they would not make U.S. companies more competitive anywhere else around the globe. I'd be interested to know what sort of market share the U.S. represents for Chinese solar panels.
Actual email text from Politico:
QuoteABC News reports on newly released emails from the administration from two years ago:
"This deal is NOT ready for prime time," one White House budget analyst wrote in a March 10, 2009 email, nine days before the administration formally announced the loan.
"If you guys think this is a bad idea, I need to unwind the W[est] W[ing] QUICKLY," wrote Ronald A. Klain, who was chief of staff to Vice President Joe Biden, in another email sent March 7, 2009.
And The Washington Post reports that the administration tried to "rush federal reviews" on the loan so that Biden could make the announcement in September 2009 at a groundbreaking for Solyndra's new factory:
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."
"We have ended up with a situation of having to do rushed approvals on a couple of occasions (and we are worried about Solyndra at the end of the week)," one official wrote. That Aug. 31, 2009, message, written by a senior OMB staffer and sent to Terrell P. McSweeny, Biden's domestic policy adviser, concluded, "We would prefer to have sufficient time to do our due diligence reviews."
Quote from: Conan71 on September 14, 2011, 10:49:59 AM
I'll take PR opportunity for $500, Gaspar!
Yes, I'm aware it's Faux, but after reading multiple articles, it summarizes it best:
At least as far as removing the U.S. from becoming a dumping ground for cheap Chinese solar panels, tariffs would help. Unfortunately, they would not make U.S. companies more competitive anywhere else around the globe. I'd be interested to know what sort of market share the U.S. represents for Chinese solar panels.
Actual email text from Politico:
I'm reporting you to AttackWatch.com
See. . .That didn't take long.
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/solyndra-blame-bush-obama-officials/story?id=14513389
Solyndra: Blame It On Bush, Say Obama Officials
Quote from: Gaspar on September 14, 2011, 01:27:53 PM
See. . .That didn't take long.
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/solyndra-blame-bush-obama-officials/story?id=14513389
Solyndra: Blame It On Bush, Say Obama Officials
How long before this White House starts seeing giant rabbits?
Of note, the Bush OMB refused the loan gauaranty because its analysis indicated Solyndra would be insolvent by Sept. 2011. Oops.
Quote from: Gaspar on September 14, 2011, 11:55:49 AM
I'm reporting you to AttackWatch.com
Too late. I took your lead and preemptively turned myself in. I said some really choice things when I did it too!
Quote from: DTowner on September 14, 2011, 02:02:17 PM
Of note, the Bush OMB refused the loan gauaranty because its analysis indicated Solyndra would be insolvent by Sept. 2011. Oops.
I wish the rest of the Bush Administration could have been so prescient.
Quote from: nathanm on September 14, 2011, 03:15:48 PM
I wish the rest of the Bush Administration could have been so prescient.
You mean the ones who convinced Bush that Iraq and Afghanistan would be 12 month milk runs?
Quote from: Conan71 on September 14, 2011, 03:40:11 PM
You mean the ones who convinced Bush that Iraq and Afghanistan would be 12 month milk runs?
You got it. Stupidly enough, I didn't make the connection at the time, but drawing us into a war in Afghanistan was most likely al Qaeda's goal with the September 11th attacks. They knew from previous experience with the Soviets that they could win such a war in a long, slow grind, sapping our power in the process.
By 2004, I still thought the war in Afghanistan was a good idea even as I opposed going into Iraq. Stupid me.
Quote from: nathanm on September 14, 2011, 03:52:37 PM
You got it. Stupidly enough, I didn't make the connection at the time, but drawing us into a war in Afghanistan was most likely al Qaeda's goal with the September 11th attacks. They knew from previous experience with the Soviets that they could win such a war in a long, slow grind, sapping our power in the process.
By 2004, I still thought the war in Afghanistan was a good idea even as I opposed going into Iraq. Stupid me.
Something had to be done about the Taliban and intel that OBL was hiding in the mountains there. If Bush hadn't gone in, we may well have faced more terrorist attacks around the world. I suspect anyone who was president at the time would have wound up in Afghanistan as the American people were expecting some sort of response and retaliation. And you are correct, we learned nothing from the Soviet's involvement there.
OBL is dead now, so what exactly is it we are doing there at this point? No amount of time spent there is going to produce a more stable government.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 14, 2011, 03:57:17 PM
Something had to be done about the Taliban and intel that OBL was hiding in the mountains there. If Bush hadn't gone in, we may well have faced more terrorist attacks around the world. I suspect anyone who was president at the time would have wound up in Afghanistan as the American people were expecting some sort of response and retaliation. And you are correct, we learned nothing from the Soviet's involvement there.
OBL is dead now, so what exactly is it we are doing there at this point? No amount of time spent there is going to produce a more stable government.
Something only had to be done about the Taliban if you accept the premise that it is we who are responsible for ensuring human rights around the world. If so, we have a lot more work to do and will be expending much more blood and treasure on the project. I'm not entirely opposed to that view, but I don't think that's really how we want to operate.
Despite invading Afghanistan, there were many terrorist attacks around the world. London, Madrid, Bali, Mumbai, and the list goes on. I can't even attribute OBL's assassination to the invasion of Afghanistan. At least we got the Taliban. Sort of..not really. We would have been better off not sending a full scale invasion force, but that's hindsight talking.
Quote from: nathanm on September 14, 2011, 04:07:37 PM
Something only had to be done about the Taliban if you accept the premise that it is we who are responsible for ensuring human rights around the world. If so, we have a lot more work to do and will be expending much more blood and treasure on the project. I'm not entirely opposed to that view, but I don't think that's really how we want to operate.
Despite invading Afghanistan, there were many terrorist attacks around the world. London, Madrid, Bali, Mumbai, and the list goes on. I can't even attribute OBL's assassination to the invasion of Afghanistan. At least we got the Taliban. Sort of..not really. We would have been better off not sending a full scale invasion force, but that's hindsight talking.
I can't really be critical of the military's approach while knowing not even 1/3 of what they know in the way of intelligence and the worth of continuing the mission. It's obvious though, approaching ten year's involvement there that most Americans have had enough of it. Enough bloodshed and enough money being poured down a rat hole. As long as we are not seeing large-scale terrorist attacks, it's got the image of working, but again, we never really know what has been prevented when attacks don't happen. We only know when they do.
Is the fact that we've not seen another attack on near the scale of 9/11 since that day coincidental, or is it a direct result of our intervention in Afghanistan or Iraq? No one can say for certain either way. I'm quite convinced of that.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 14, 2011, 04:27:41 PM
I can't really be critical of the military's approach while knowing not even 1/3 of what they know in the way of intelligence and the worth of continuing the mission. It's obvious though, approaching ten year's involvement there that most Americans have had enough of it. Enough bloodshed and enough money being poured down a rat hole. As long as we are not seeing large-scale terrorist attacks, it's got the image of working, but again, we never really know what has been prevented when attacks don't happen. We only know when they do.
Is the fact that we've not seen another attack on near the scale of 9/11 since that day coincidental, or is it a direct result of our intervention in Afghanistan or Iraq? No one can say for certain either way. I'm quite convinced of that.
I'm pretty sure it has nothing or very little to do with Iraq. All the reports I continue to see still say there was no link between Hussein and al Qaeda. Was Hussein a madman? You bet. Did we drop the ball on Afghanistan while toppling regimes in Iraq? Yep. I was not for the invasion of Iraq after I saw the non-evidence of WMD and only tepidly for it in the beginning. I really didn't have any opinion of the Bush administration before that and about 6 months after 9/11. Bush's whole 'we don't know where OBL is and we don't care' (paraphrasing, of course) really ticked me off. I'm sure there were about 2800 families who did care. That started my dislike for his administration. Then he and FEMA botched Katrina.
Quote from: Hoss on September 14, 2011, 05:22:12 PM
I'm pretty sure it has nothing or very little to do with Iraq. All the reports I continue to see still say there was no link between Hussein and al Qaeda. Was Hussein a madman? You bet. Did we drop the ball on Afghanistan while toppling regimes in Iraq? Yep. I was not for the invasion of Iraq after I saw the non-evidence of WMD and only tepidly for it in the beginning. I really didn't have any opinion of the Bush administration before that and about 6 months after 9/11. Bush's whole 'we don't know where OBL is and we don't care' (paraphrasing, of course) really ticked me off. I'm sure there were about 2800 families who did care. That started my dislike for his administration. Then he and FEMA botched Katrina.
And? And?
He eats baby.
(http://www.robertwoo.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/bush-eating-baby.jpg)(http://i1041.photobucket.com/albums/b412/Tifuro/Funny%20Bush%20Pictures/BushEatsBaby.jpg)
BABY!
oh, and he got in slap fights with Senate Pages...(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_u6vTKeWV8ic/SXJY9gJPjGI/AAAAAAAABrw/fYDDOI1Crm8/s400/bush_bruise2.jpg)
Quote from: Townsend on September 14, 2011, 05:37:07 PM
And? And?
He eats baby.
(http://www.robertwoo.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/bush-eating-baby.jpg)(http://i1041.photobucket.com/albums/b412/Tifuro/Funny%20Bush%20Pictures/BushEatsBaby.jpg)
BABY!
oh, and he got in slap fights with Senate Pages...(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_u6vTKeWV8ic/SXJY9gJPjGI/AAAAAAAABrw/fYDDOI1Crm8/s400/bush_bruise2.jpg)
Don't go misunderestimating me, Townie!
Quote from: Conan71 on September 14, 2011, 04:27:41 PM
Is the fact that we've not seen another attack on near the scale of 9/11 since that day coincidental, or is it a direct result of our intervention in Afghanistan or Iraq? No one can say for certain either way. I'm quite convinced of that.
We did see other attacks of that scale. They failed to produce as many bodies, but that's only because they got "lucky" (spit) on 9/11. I doubt even they expected the towers to actually collapse. Regardless, they set off three bombs in Istanbul in 2003, ten bombs in Madrid in 2004, and four bombs in London in 2005.
Maybe there would have been more had we not invaded Afghanistan, as you rightly point out, nobody can know for sure..unless they're clairvoyant. ;)
Quote from: nathanm on September 14, 2011, 06:44:03 PM
We did see other attacks of that scale. They failed to produce as many bodies, but that's only because they got "lucky" (spit) on 9/11. I doubt even they expected the towers to actually collapse. Regardless, they set off three bombs in Istanbul in 2003, ten bombs in Madrid in 2004, and four bombs in London in 2005.
Maybe there would have been more had we not invaded Afghanistan, as you rightly point out, nobody can know for sure..unless they're clairvoyant. ;)
You asked......
As you follow the money, it is now apparent that Solyndra was just the shell of the egg. Much of the money they received was used for capital improvements and leases. They purchased millions of dollars in leases that they never used from Chicago billionaire and Obama bundler Neil Bluhm (Walton Street Capital). The largest payment went to Stonebridge Capital Group's Terry Fancher who donated over $70,000 to the DNC last year before receiving a $42 Million dollar lease agreement from Solyndra in December, before being considered for the lease, his largest political donation was only $6,900 in 2008.
Quote from: Gaspar on September 15, 2011, 07:58:26 AM
As you follow the money, it is now apparent that Solyndra was just the shell of the egg. Much of the money they received was used for capital improvements and leases. They purchased millions of dollars in leases that they never used from Chicago billionaire and Obama bundler Neil Bluhm (Walton Street Capital). The largest payment went to Stonebridge Capital Group's Terry Fancher who donated over $70,000 to the DNC last year before receiving a $42 Million dollar lease agreement from Solyndra in December, before being considered for the lease, his largest political donation was only $6,900 in 2008.
Sounds like we might be close to starting an independent counsel investigation. This could be Obama's Iran-Contra or Whitewater-spermgate.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 15, 2011, 08:09:39 AM
Sounds like we might be close to starting an independent counsel investigation. This could be Obama's Iran-Contra or Whitewater-spermgate.
I just wish President Obama was as good at creating jobs as President Clinton was at getting them! :o
I've been thinking we needed another Arkansas Project... ::)
Quote from: Gaspar on September 15, 2011, 07:58:26 AM
As you follow the money, it is now apparent that Solyndra was just the shell of the egg. Much of the money they received was used for capital improvements and leases. They purchased millions of dollars in leases that they never used from Chicago billionaire and Obama bundler Neil Bluhm (Walton Street Capital). The largest payment went to Stonebridge Capital Group's Terry Fancher who donated over $70,000 to the DNC last year before receiving a $42 Million dollar lease agreement from Solyndra in December, before being considered for the lease, his largest political donation was only $6,900 in 2008.
http://www.theregistrysf.com/RTRE_solyndra.html
QuoteLandlords left hanging by Solyndra's bankruptcy petition may have to wait months and possibly years before they fully understand the fallout from the filing. Or they may know much of their fate in the next 30 days.
Solyndra leases four Fremont properties and one in Milpitas from some of the region's and nation's most high-profile landlords. According to its bankruptcy petition and documents filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission as part of its failed attempt to go public early last year, its landlords include iStar Financial Inc., Digital Realty Investment Trust and Stockbridge Capital Group. It owns a sixth building itself, 47488 Kato Terrace, also in Fremont.
With the bankruptcy, Solyndra has asked the court to allow it to reject a single lease outright, that for 400-472 Kato Terrace in Fremont. The landlord is Walton Street Capital LLC, according to court records. Solyndra, which has already vacated, also seeks to abandon its personal property at the Kato Terrace address.
Quote from: we vs us on September 15, 2011, 09:19:13 AM
http://www.theregistrysf.com/RTRE_solyndra.html
Poor Terry gets left hanging. Sent a check for $70,800 to the DNC when he purchased the building for $42.2 million, and now his lease gets canceled, and he's out $42,200,000 plus $70,800. At least he has his health.
Well, Solyndra is old news now. LightSquared is the new pay-for-play.
America needs a President....
The Phony Solyndra Solar Scandal
http://dirtyhippies.org/2011/09/14/the-phony-solyndra-solar-scandal/
"But if we're going to have a clean energy industry in this country, this kind of thing is going to happen. It doesn't mean anyone cheated."
"The other option was restructuring. Kaiser's Argonaut Ventures and the Walton family's Madrone Partners would put up an additional $75 million, which would take the first position in case of a liquidation; the government would still be paid first if the company managed to emerge from bankruptcy. Meanwhile, the Department of Energy ... ultimately concluded it did have a potentially viable business. The new factory was on time and on budget. Sales were increasing steadily. And even if Solyndra failed, it would be much more valuable with a completed high-tech plant than with an empty box in Fremont, California."
""George Kaiser is not an investor in Solyndra and did not participate in any discussions with the U.S. government regarding the loan," the statement said. "GKFF invests in a globally diversified portfolio across many different asset classes."
"The conservative Wal-Mart Walton Family, however, were private investors through their Madrone Capital, and at the time that the Bush administration started pushing the Solyndra loan were in a position to peronally profit from this investment. If any accusation of an expectation of personal enrichment obtained from political connections should be investigated, it is this one. Will the Republican House look into the connections between the Walton family and Bush administration officials, and the Bush administrations efforts to provide loans to Solyndra?"
"The Government Didn't Lose
Even though Solyndra went into bankruptcy the government didn't "lose." The purpose of the government's involvement was to help trigger the development of green-energy manufacturing in the United States, not to help individual companies. This was not a direct investment in a company with the expectation of a profit for the government. In the bigger picture of promoting American leadership in the emerging green-energy industry the government's loan guarantee was a success. Even though Solyndra's investors lost out our country retains the trained skilled employees, the intellectual property, the innovators funded, the suppliers, and the factory. As components of a national effort to trigger a key strategic industry, those are all still there and in the US.
It isn't the government's job to make sure the investors make money, the government's job is to work to keep all of these components of an industry here and to grow new ones here, and this is what has been accomplished. When a VC makes an investment, a company failing just goes on the books as a loss. But our government has succeeded even if Solyndra's investors lost money because the country as a whole benefits. All these employees are trained, all the researchers can take what they know to other solar companies, the IP is going to be sold — and it should be part of the conditions that it be sold to an American company. So while Solyndra's for-profit investors lost money, America's larger effort to nurture a solar-power industry continues toward its goal with assets enabled by this loan guarantee."
The loan program started under President Bush.
READUPANDSHUDUP
Quote from: Conan71 on September 15, 2011, 08:09:39 AM
Sounds like we might be close to starting an independent counsel investigation. This could be Obama's Iran-Contra or Whitewater-spermgate.
TNFers have taught me much about conspiratorialists....
http://www.enviroknow.com/2011/09/14/solyndra-facts/
I hope you were jesting, Conman.
Wow, that's some great spin right there. The request was originated under the Bush administration and it was turned down by the Bush admin.
Having learned to play the game, Gibson is now marketing a solar guitar!
Quote from: Conan71 on September 15, 2011, 04:25:34 PM
Wow, that's some great spin right there. The request was originated under the Bush administration and it was turned down by the Bush admin.
Kinda like Cheney then Powell?
The Obama administration is in a race against the clock to close by month's end more than a dozen renewable-energy loan guarantees totaling $9 billion that are all failing.
Probably ought to move further discussion to a Solyndra thread since we are way, way OT here.
Oh per proper forum decorum: Marshall's!