posted June 15, 2012 06:46 PM            

If....one rejects data, or finding data, or being oriented to find data, then there's no way for one to have an opinion. You CAN'T have an opinion if you reject data, because every opinion is informed by something. If you can't articulate what that is, or if you can't reference the source, then the opinion becomes moot, because there's nothing invested in it.

quote:

---

Data is only as good as the ones creating it and their agendas.

---

posted June 15, 2012 06:55 PM            

Right now, businesses are failing. People are losing their houses. That is enough data, right there.

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted June 15, 2012 07:04 PM            

Romney didn't give a penny to that solar company. In fact, that loan was approved by a board..none of the members of which were appointed by Romney...and the loan was approved BEFORE Romney became Governor.

Further, every penny of that loan which was dispersed during Romney's term as Governor...WAS REPAID. You know Ami..REPAID..unlike O'Bomber chisling pals at Solyndra who paid off O'Bomber with campaign contributions then defaulted on $535,000,000 in loaned taxpayer money.

posted June 15, 2012 07:12 PM            

We know a lot of the reasons why businesses fail, and why they're failing now. Some people claim it's this administration, but is that accurate? Isn't it more likely that business failure is happening because people are spending less as they await the economy's recovery? That's not the only reason businesses are failing, but as a prevalent theme, I'm sure that's one of them. Obama can't make people spend more money. Nor can he get away with giving out cash like George Bush ahead of him, because that would be more government spending.

posted June 15, 2012 07:28 PM            

You know who also inherited a plan to grant loans to green energy companies like Solyndra? Obama. No one needs cover his ass on those loans. They've been investigated, and no such allegations have ever been found to be true, Jwhop. You'd know that if you read what I post here.

posted June 15, 2012 07:48 PM            

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted June 15, 2012 10:07 PM            

Romney was NOT Governor when that loan was approved. Romney did not appoint a single board member who approved that loan to that solar company. And, that loan was completely repaid.

Just more leftist horseshiit to cover O'Bomber's sorry corrupt ass. But it's not working.

posted June 15, 2012 10:16 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by katatonic:
unblock your own ami, AG is pretty open already. your agenda is not invisible. and you are still mistaking manners for substance.

---

Didn't you take a mini hiatus? Wait...... I think I hear your mother calling

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted June 16, 2012 12:05 PM            

On Konarka, regardless of the loan being approved before he came into office, it's still reported that he himself brought them the money, and made a press conference out of it, so regardless of whether or not it's something he initiated, he certainly took the opportunity to put his face and name on it. The loan was repaid, BUT why are they going bankrupt? Because they've been unable to find more funding, which means repayment was made with other solicited funding. The company never made a profit on product. Bigger picture, though, as has been on display in this thread, when Romney finds your company investment-worthy, you better start looking for other work.

posted June 16, 2012 12:39 PM            

More bullshiiit from leftists who are just full of it.

No, Bush Really Didn’t OK The Solyndra Loans
By Sean Higgins
Fri., Sept. 23, 2011

A key part of the Democrats’ pushback over the Solyndra scandal has been to spread the blame. They argue that the $527 million in loan guarantees made to the now-bankrupt solar panel company were just as much the doing of the George W. Bush administration as they were of the current administration.

This argument has been pushed repeatedly by the Democrats on the Energy and Commerce committee, by liberal groups like Media Matters and even by the Energy Department itself, which has been emailing reporters regular press releases spinning the scandal.

For example, Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., ranking Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce investigation subcommittee, asked Friday, “Whether the Bush and Obama administration conducted due diligence on the loan guarantee.”

But the facts don’t justify this claim. The bottom line remains that the Bush Administration did not approve the Solyndra loan guarantee. And just before they headed out of town, Bush officials ordered the project back to the drawing board.

Democrats argue the Energy Department first received the loan request in December 2006. By January 2009, it was still under consideration. That month, the department’s Loan Guarantee Credit Committee put the project on hold.

In a terse one-page memo, dated Jan. 9, 2009, the committee noted that the “apparent haste in recommending the project meant that certain LGPO (Loan Guarantee Program Office) credit procedures were not adhered to.”

It further stated that: “While the project appears to have merit, there are several areas where the information presented did not thoroughly support a finding that the project is ready to be approved at this time.” It then cited four areas of concern.

First was the lack of any “independent market study addressing long-term prospects for this specific company.” An independent credit assessment had “raised the issue of obsolescence in marketing this project.” Obsolescence? That’s never a good word to hear in a product marketing study.

Second, it noted that the committee had never seen a supposed sales agreement the company had for its product even though an unnamed “outside legal advisor” had. In other words, the committee only had vague assurances that there was even a buyer for the product.

Third, it noted, “There are questions regarding the nature and the strength of parent guarantee for completion of the project.” In other words, the committee wasn’t convinced the project would even be finished.

Fourth and finally, it vaguely noted “concern” over production start “scale-up” at a second Solyndra facility.

The memo concludes by saying “the number of issues unresolved makes a recommendation for approval premature at this time” and sent the project back to the LGPO for “further development of information.”

That strikes Capital Hill as a pretty damning — not to mention prescient — analysis of the Solyndra loan proposal. The loan wasn’t ready and Bush’s Energy Department wasn’t going to approve it. If Solyndra had proved to be a success, green energy fans would today probably be claiming the Bush White House had dragged its feet and endangered the project.

At the very least it shows that the Bush administration was doing the “due diligence” that DeGette questioned.

The one thing the Bush administration did not do was kill the project outright and it is on that one thin reed that Obama administration officials and their allies have made their case.

Here’s how DOE spokesman Damien LaVera put it in an email to reporters:

On January 9, 2009, a Credit Committee of five career federal employees reviewed the progress of the Department’s due diligence on the transaction. The group decided to continue the due diligence process rather than recommend the loan guarantee immediately proceed for further approvals. As the (documentation) from that meeting makes clear, the committee did not reject the application. It noted that the project “appears to have merit” and simply remanded the application “without prejudice” so that work could continue and so that the committee would have additional time to review the documentation.

Note the complete absence of any of the committee’s criticisms of the project in his statement.

What happened next in the loan was that by mid-March of 2009 the project was sailing through. LaVera stated in his email that, “This is just a case of responsible career federal employees who wanted a bit of extra time and information to make their decision.”

Yes, but something else changed in the intervening two months: A new administration came in. As the New York Times reported Friday:

The Energy Department’s senior staff has acknowledged in interviews the intense pressure from top Obama administration officials to rush stimulus spending out the door.

“We had to knock down some barriers standing in the way to get these projects funded,” Matthew C. Rogers, the Energy Department official overseeing the loan guarantee program, said in March 2009, just days before Solyndra got its provisional loan commitment. Mr. Rogers said Energy Secretary Steven Chu had been personally reviewing loan applications and urging faster action on them.

There were two administrations involved in this project. One, after more than two years of consideration, was still sending it back for further review. That was the Bush administration. The second was placing “intense pressure” on department staff to approve loans from the moment it walked in the door and even had the energy secretary himself personally reviewing each loan. That was the Obama administration.
http://blogs.investors.com/capitalhill/index.php/home/35-politicsinvesting/2780-no-bush-really-didnt-ok-the-solyndra-loans

Then, along comes the utterly corrupt O'Bomber who fast tracks that loan to pay off a big political contributor, sticks taxpayers with more than half a billion in defaults and the result was predictible...bankruptcy!

You're one who just doesn't get it acoustic...as usual. You're like a little parrot for every bit of kook nonsense leftists attempt to spin to cover O'Bomber's sorry corrupt ass.

posted June 16, 2012 01:18 PM              

------------------

posted June 16, 2012 01:53 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by katatonic:
Didn't you take a mini hiatus? Wait...... I think I hear your mother calling - ami anne

---

Quaking in my boots

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted June 18, 2012 07:13 PM            

Immediately upon entering the White House, O'Bomber fast-tracked that loan...with no further checking and the article states the pressure on energy dept personnel was tremenous to do so.

Further, a bundler for O'Bomber...Kaiser, just happened to be the biggest investor in Solyndra. Further, when Solyndra defaulted and went bankrupt, the O'Bomber administration made sure Kaiser got paid back and taxpayers got nothing from the sale of Solyndra assets.

More than 70% of all the so called green energy loan guarantees went to demoscat contributors...or O'Bomber's personal campaign contributors. That's political corruption pure and simple.

Further, that's not the only article on this subject. Before whining and attempting to dismiss what was said, you would be wise to read what's already been said before on the subject because it's been laid our chapter and verse and it spells political corruption.

posted June 18, 2012 08:45 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jwhop:
The Solyndra loan guarantee was put on hold by the Bush Energy dept for serious gaps in documentation...which were never filled.

Immediately upon entering the White House, O'Bomber fast-tracked that loan...with no further checking and the article states the pressure on energy dept personnel was tremenous to do so.

Further, a bundler for O'Bomber...Kaiser, just happened to be the biggest investor in Solyndra. Further, when Solyndra defaulted and went bankrupt, the O'Bomber administration made sure Kaiser got paid back and taxpayers got nothing from the sale of Solyndra assets.

More than 70% of all the so called green energy loan guarantees went to demoscat contributors...or O'Bomber's personal campaign contributors. That's political corruption pure and simple.

Further, that's not the only article on this subject. Before whining and attempting to dismiss what was said, you would be wise to read what's already been said before on the subject because it's been laid our chapter and verse and it spells political corruption.

If it was just Solyndra, that would be one thing. But it's not just Solyndra. There have been a rash of failed solar and wind projects all funded with O'Bomber taxpayer cash to his campaign contributors and they blew up in taxpayers faces.

---

posted June 19, 2012 01:25 PM            

What you're claiming about Kaiser is speculation. Those aren't confirmed facts in this case.

Hours after committee Republicans released the emails, Democrats on the panel issued an eight-page memo that disputed nearly all of the GOP claims. The memo quotes an interview Kaiser gave Tuesday by videoconference with Republican and Democratic staffers on the committee.

In the interview, Kaiser stated, "I have never lobbied for Solyndra."

The Democratic memo cites several emails not included by Republicans in their release of documents Wednesday, including one in which Kaiser tells Ken Levit, executive director of the Kaiser foundation, that he sat next to Obama for two hours at a Las Vegas dinner fundraising dinner that also included Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

"I talked in general about the Chinese and solar, but I didn't want to get too specific with him," Kaiser wrote of his Oct. 22, 2010 dinner with Obama. "I never mentioned Solyndra directly."

The emails also show Kaiser chiding subordinates who urged him to personally lobby White House officials on behalf of Solyndra. Kaiser's foundation had invested $400 million in the solar company.

"I question the assumption that WH is the path to pursue when both of your issues here are with DOE," Kaiser wrote in an email to Mitchell, referring to the White House and the Energy Department. If the White House intervened, Kaiser added, "I am concerned that DOE/Chu would resent the intervention and your problem would get more difficult."

Democratic Reps. Henry Waxman of California and Diana DeGette of Colorado said that far from showing a concerted effort by Kaiser to lobby on behalf of Solyndra, the emails and the staff interview with Kaiser show the opposite. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/09/george-kaiser-solyndra_n_1084568.html

posted June 23, 2015 04:49 PM            

poly ticks and astrology,