Posted Sep 17th 2011 at 1:27 pm
From the invaluable John Kass in The Chicago Tribune:
The Solyndra scandal cost at least a half-billion public dollars. It is plaguing President Barack Obama. And it’s being billed as a Washington story.
But back in Obama’s political hometown, those of us familiar with the Chicago Way can see something else in Solyndra — something that the Washington crowd calls “optics.” In fact, it’s not just a Washington saga — it has all the elements of a Chicago City Hall story, except with more zeros.
The FBI is investigating what happened with Solyndra, a solar panel company that got a $535 million government-backed loan with the help of the Obama White House over the objections of federal budget analysts.
September 17, 2011 | Categories: 2012 Election, Agency Regulation, America's Freedoms, Balanced Budget, Congress, Congress: Inquiries & Committees, Constitutional Responsibilities, Consumer Issues, Corruption, Corruption in Government, Deficit, Economic Security, Elections Politics, Employer Uncertainty, Energy and Oil, Excessive Government Spending, Fiscal Responsibility, Freedom Justice and Liberty, Government, Government Appointments, Green Agenda, House of Representatives, Liberals Big Spending and Taxes, Media Corruption, Most Americans Reject Socialism, National Debt, National Security, New Media News, Political Incompetence, Politics, Radical Liberal Progressive Left, Redistribution of Wealth, Scandals, Senate, Smaller Government, The Economy, The Environment, Treason, Unemployment | Tags: bankruptcy, Barack Obama, Chicago Way, clean energy, Culture of Corruption, DC Corruption, Energy, environment, federal loan, Federal Spending, green energy, News, Obama, politics, Solyndra, stimulus | Leave A Comment »
Posted Aug 12th 2011 at 1:45 pm
This WaPo article — “Obama tries to change subject back to green jobs” — is an instant classic of a new, Obama-era genre: cheerleading for expensive schemes which exist solely due to political whimsy and consideration, and are therefore little more than make-work.
The item begins, “After spending weeks talking about topics he probably would have preferred to avoid — debt limits, deficits, a plunging stock market — President Obama will hit the road Thursday to talk about jobs. Specifically, about how his administration is trying to create more of them.”
The green ones. Which schemes failed where the president used to tell us to look but no longer does because the failures were exposed. As his spokesman admits “the White House doesn’t create jobs”.
And his critics say he’s out of ideas! But, hmm. Yes. I suppose that ‘green jobs’ thing went over well last time he led with it. Still, if ending up as a punch-line is victory, what does defeat look like?
More to the point, how much would whatever constitutes defeat cost us? Because WaPo says about this, the Obama administration’s chosen, sterling example of the economy they seek to design (what happened to telling us to look to Spain?), in return for $305 million in cited wealth transfers, “All told, the company has said its advanced battery operations could create 500 new positions.”
That is, this rosy, nice round-numbered scenario of ‘could’ (read: unlikely), produce temporary jobs — that is, they all disappear when the wealth transfer and/or mandates or preferences are burned through — at $610,000 per.
August 12, 2011 | Categories: 2012 Election, Agency Regulation, America's Freedoms, Balanced Budget, Cloward and Piven Strategy, Congress, Constitution, Constitutional Responsibilities, Corruption, Corruption in Government, Deficit, Economic Security, Economic Terrorism, Election 2012, Elections Politics, EPA Regulations, Excessive Government Spending, Federal Reserve Bank, Foreign Policy, Freedom Justice and Liberty, Fuel Prices, Government, Government Regulations, Jobs, Liberals Big Spending and Taxes, Manufactured Crisis, Media Corruption, Middle East Affairs, Most Americans Reject Socialism, National Debt, National Security, New Media News, Political Incompetence, Politics, Propaganda, Radical Liberal Progressive Left, Recovery, Scandals, Smaller Government, TEA Taxed Enough Already, The Economy, The Environment, Unemployment, Value of the Dollar | Tags: Al Gore, clean energy economy, Council on Economic Advisors, deficit, employment, Energy, environment, excessive government spending, Federal Spending, green energy, green jobs (?), Harry Reid, jobs, Kenisian economics, more of stimulus' biggest bust, National Debt, Obama, Obama Perfect September Storm, obama speech, Regulation, SBA, Small Business Administration, stimulus, subsidies, WaPo | Leave A Comment »
Posted Jan 27th 2011 at 3:01 pm
I agree with the liberal blogosphere- Obama’s State of the Union was “Reaganesque.” Well written and well delivered. Awe-inspiring. Except that it was all distortions, false promises, and bait and switch. Don’t believe a word. It was pure sales and marketing, with zero substance. It was the same old “Cash for Flunkers.” Failed programs renamed “investments” in order to sell the con.
Obama’s State of the Union reminds me of the Taco Bell lawsuit in the news this same week. California consumers are suing Taco Bell for calling an item on their menu a “beef taco.” The class-action lawsuit claims that the “beef taco” barely has any beef in it — less than 35% to be exact. Instead, the lawsuit claims it contains isolated oat product, binders and extenders.
Well, that beef taco would make Obama proud. There’s no meat in Obama’s product either. Obama knows his audience likes meat, so he mixes in a spoonful of meat, along with isolated oat product, binders, extenders and other assorted artificial rubbish that tastes a little like meat. He wins your support with the bait and switch. But there is no substance. Where’s the beef? When Obama is done with the Presidency, he has the perfect skills to serve as CEO of Taco Bell.
Obama’s real State of the Union is just more campaign payola. Can you imagine if we played a game of “What does he really mean?” Just substitute “wasted government spending and debt for the same old failed programs” every time Obama used the word “investment” in the State of the Union speech. That’s the unvarnished truth — without the sales and marketing, without the bait and switch.
January 27, 2011 | Categories: 2012 Election, America's Freedoms, Cloward and Piven Strategy, Congress, Constitution, Corruption, Corruption in Government, Deficit, Elections Politics, Foreign Policy, Government, Healthcare, House of Representatives, Media Corruption, Most Americans Reject Socialism, National Debt, New Media News, Politics, POTUS Elibility Issue, Progressives pushing for Marxism/Socialism, Radical Liberal Progressive Left, Redistribution of Wealth, Senate, Smaller Government, The Economy, Value of the Dollar | Tags: Barack Obama, clean energy, Economics, Federal Spending, government spending, green economy, green energy, Obama, Obamacare, politics, State of the Union, taco bell, Wall Street bailout Congress | 1 Comment »
New York Times
Published: November 3, 2010
SAN FRANCISCO — California voters yesterday upheld the state’s global warming law on two fronts, rejecting a Republican candidate for governor who wanted to delay it while turning aside a referendum funded by oil companies that would have dismantled the measure for years to come.
With roughly half of all precincts reporting at press time this morning, national and state news organizations had proclaimed victory for Democrat Jerry Brown over Republican Meg Whitman in the gubernatorial race and a sizable defeat for Proposition 23, which would have delayed California’s climate change law until unemployment in the state dropped to 5.5 percent for a full year.
Prop 23 lost behind a coalition of environmental groups, clean-tech companies, Silicon Valley venture capitalists and hedge fund managers who all had a stake in seeing the statewide climate law, A.B. 32, continue its march toward implementation in 2012. The same coalition helped to elect Brown over Whitman, a former CEO of eBay Inc. who promised on the campaign trail to delay A.B. 32 for one year if elected.
Fred Krupp, president of Environmental Defense Fund, said the Prop 23 defeat sends “a big signal” to the rest of the country and the world that Californians stand firmly behind the law, which would cut greenhouse gas emissions in the state to 1990 levels by 2020. He called the level of cooperation between the fledgling clean-tech sector and environmental groups unprecedented, giving the “No on 23″ campaign the street muscle and the money it needed to prevail.
“This is the largest referendum anywhere on the planet where people have directly voted on clean energy and climate policy,” Krupp said in an interview. “It’s the largest state in the country sending a clear message that they want a clean energy economy and clean energy jobs.”
The crucial flaw for “Yes on 23″ appeared to have been its direct connection to two Texas-based refining companies, Valero Energy Corp. and Tesoro Corp., which spearheaded the effort and easily led in contributions with multimillion-dollar donations. The “No on 23″ campaign strategy from the outset sought to paint the measure as the product of “dirty energy companies” from Texas, and the message appeared to stick with voters.
Ann Notthoff, California advocacy director for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said that in her 30 years of work as an environmental advocate she had never seen a coalition come together so forcefully. The message appeared to be so resonant that bigger oil companies — including San Ramon, Calif.-based Chevron Corp., one of the biggest polluters in the state — stayed out of the fight and never came to the financial defense of the Texas refiners.
November 3, 2010 | Categories: America's Energy, America's Freedoms, Americans Reject Sharia and Islamic Supremacism, Cap and Tax, Constitution, Elections Politics, Energy and Oil, Global Climate Change, Government, Liberals Big Spending and Taxes, Most Americans Reject Socialism, New Media News, Progressives pushing for Marxism/Socialism, Radical Liberal Progressive Left, Recovery, Rights of States, The Economy, The Environment, Undermining Constitution | Tags: California legislation, global warming, green energy, NYT, oil companies, referendum, Texas refiners | Leave A Comment »
July 6, 2010 – 4:45 PM | by: Michael Tobin
The Obama administration just announced a handout of $2 Billion to build solar panels. The development of this type of energy is politically sexy. Jobs are created to build and maintain the panels, which scream eco-friendly every time they appear on camera.
No one is criticizing the initiative, but it overlooks a power source boasting far greater reliability and intensity than both solar and wind power. Arguably, it produces NO carbon footprint. You could even say it creates a negative carbon footprint.
The source is recycled energy. Instead of burning a fuel to create energy, it takes energy that we are otherwise throwing away and converting that into something useable. It captures heat that otherwise disappears into thin air and turns the heat into power.
July 7, 2010 | Categories: America's Energy, Education, Energy and Oil, Jobs, New Media News, Science & Technology, The Economy, The Environment | Tags: environment, green energy, Illinois Power Agency, Mark Pruitt, Mike Tobin, Recycled Energy | Leave A Comment »