Friday, September 30, 2011

Worker Scales Washington Monument to Inspect Quake Damage

No Fear of Heights Allowed in This Job!

Photobucket

555 feet at the top of the Washington Monument a worker prepares the ropes which will enable a crew to survey the outside of the structure. More photos at Roll Call.

And if you haven't seen the video from inside the monument as the quake struck and terrified tourists head for the stairs as mortar starts to shower them, there are two views. Here and here.

Thursday, September 29, 2011

"Pass This Bill Now" Gets Little to No Support from Dems in Congress

Even Obama is backing away from the urgent rhetoric he once used for this bill to nowhere!

It's been three weeks since Obama stood in the Well of Congress and repeatedly demanded that Congress "pass this bill now" for legislation that had not even been written. 11 days ago Democrats were lining up to oppose the bill which had not yet been formally introduced.

Now, the bill has finally been introduced in both the House and Senate but guess what? No one is stepping forward to co-sponsor the legislation. In the House, Rep. John Larson (D-CT) introduced the bill “at the request of the president.” What is highly unusual is that the bill has NO co-sponsors. Usually with legislation that is considered a very high priority dozens or more co-sponsors will come forward to show their support by attaching their name to the bill. Not here.

The same in the Senate where Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) introduced the bill with no co-sponsors. Even more indicative of Reid's attitude towards the bill is his refusal to bring it up for consideration until after a brief vacation and then only after other business.

Readers may also have noticed that Obama has dropped the urgency of his appeal to "pass this bill now." It's been a week since Obama used a bridge over the Ohio River as a photo-op for the last of his "pass this bill now" events. Of course it didn't help that the bridge, like others Obama used earlier, wasn't in danger of falling down and plans for expanding it won't be "shovel ready" for years.

Since then, Obama moved on to his renewed class warfare attacks. Proof once again that for Obama, it isn't about results. It's all about politics!

UPDATE: Senate Dem Leader Durbin Admits Dems won't pass bill & begs for GOP support!

Recognizing that a number of Senate Dems won't vote for the bill Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) the Senate Majority Whip says that "we’re not gonna have 100 percent of Democratic senators. That’s why it needs to be bipartisan and I hope we can find some Republicans who will join us to make it happen. Really? After Obama has demonized Congressional Republicans for months, the Senate Whip wants to beg Senate Republicans for help to "pass this bill?" Why? So Obama can score a victory and go right on blaming the GOP for everything? No thanks!

Wednesday, September 28, 2011

NJ Governor Chris Christie Says "No" AGAIN About Running for Prez in 2012!

But he delivered one humdinger of a speech at the Reagan Library!

During the Q&A which followed, he referred people who were asking about the possibility of a 2012 run by him to a montage of past Christie statements. He hasn't changed his mind. What a shame!


It's a speech with heavy emphasis on the concept of American exceptionalism, a very Reagan trait, Governor Christie compares Reagan's record of leadership to that of Obama. But he also compared Obama's 2004 call to end partisanship with his record once in office:
CHRISTIE: In 2004, Illinois State Senator Barack Obama gave us a window into his vision for American leadership. He said, "Now even as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us -- the spin masters, the negative ad peddlers who embrace the politics of 'anything goes.' Well, I say to them tonight, there is not a liberal America and a conservative America -- there is the United States of America. There is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and Asian America -- there's the United States of America."

Now, seven years later, President Obama prepares to divide our nation to achieve re-election. This is not a leadership style, this is a re-election strategy. Telling those who are scared and struggling that the only way their lives can get better is to diminish the success of others. Trying to cynically convince those who are suffering that the American economic pie is no longer a growing one that can provide more prosperity for all who work hard. Insisting that we must tax and take and demonize those who have already achieved the American Dream. That may turn out to be a good re-election strategy for President Obama, but is a demoralizing message for America. What happened to State Senator Obama? When did he decide to become one of the "dividers" he spoke of so eloquently in 2004? There is, of course, a different choice.
Full text from Real Clear Politics:
CHRISTIE: Mrs. Reagan, distinguished guests. It is an honor for me to be here at the Reagan Library to speak to you today. I want to thank Mrs. Reagan for her gracious invitation. I am thrilled to be here.

Saturday, September 24, 2011

Is Rick Perry In Danger of Becoming the Fred Thompson of 2012?

Two bad debate performances in a row are not helpful to a front runner who wants to stay in front!

Those readers old enough to remember may recall that in his first debate with Democrat Walter Mondale in October 1984 President Reagan appeared sluggish and tired. Mondale used that perception to raise the question of Reagan's age. It wasn't until the second debate that Reagan turned things around by quipping that "I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience" [video].

Reagan had been over-prepared for the first debate. His head stuffed with facts and figures to the point where the real substance of the man was masked. It took Nancy Reagan to step in and cut Reagan loose from the handlers. The cry went up "let Reagan be Reagan!"

Let Rick be Rick!

If Texas Governor Rick Perry is serious about holding onto his prime position in the GOP presidential nominating contest for 2012 his wife needs to step in a tell his handlers to "let Rick be Rick."

In Perry's first debate performance at the Reagan Library in California he did quite well. But in the last two debates his performance suffered. He cannot afford to have another such night.

Perry had a perfect opportunity to go after Romney on the issue of being a flip flopper and a fair weather conservative. He blew it as this clip shows:





Perry also made a huge mistake by appearing to be defensive on the issue of state tuition rates for illegal aliens in Texas. He could have batted the matter away by saying it was a state's rights issue and one that was the prerogative of the Texas legislature but he choose to suggest instead that people who disagreed were heartless. Not a wise choice of words to describe potential GOP voters who see things differently.

Like Reagan in 1984, Perry is said to have been "tired" on the day of the debate. He appeared to be over-prepared with what were supposed to be catchy phrases that bombed when he mis-delivered. In doing so, he made his chief opponent Romney look better by comparison.

At the Florida CPAC meeting on Friday Perry fired back:
"As conservatives we know that values and vision matter. It’s not who is the slickest candidate or the smoothest debater that we need to elect. We need to elect the candidate with the best record and the best vision for this country.
...
"The model for socialized medicine has already been tried and it failed, not just in Western Europe but in Massachusetts ... what’s happening in Massachusetts gives us a window into this country’s future... "If RomneyCare cost Massachusetts 18,000 jobs, just think what it will do to the rest of this country."
It's fine for Perry to make those points in speeches, which he delivers very well, but debates DO matter. Imagine the field day the "news" media would have if Perry went up against Obama with a performance like the one last Thursday? Even though Obama is no star without a TelePrompter and king of the "uhs" in extemporaneous remarks the media will pounce on Perry's weak points and ignore Obama's.

Thursday's debate was was the most watched of all the debates to date. 6.1 million viewers had a chance to see Perry at his best and instead saw him at his worst.

It would be a great disappointment to those seeking a conservative "anti-Romney" candidate to find out Rick Perry was the Fred Thompson of 2012!

UPDATE: Perry finishes disappointing second in Florida Straw Poll:

Cain 37% Perry 15% Romney 14% Santorum 11% Paul 10% Bachmannn -- last place... A story in the LA Times describes how hard the Perry team worked to pull off a win at the Florida event. Every campaign can expect some ups and downs and Perry's is no different. But in the end, it's not the free breakfast or photo with the candidate that counts. It's the seamless match between message and messenger at every step along the campaign trail!

Friday, September 23, 2011

Sen. McConnell Blasts Obama's Bridge into Fantasy Land

Two and a half years after the first "urgent" stimulus and Obama is still campaigning for more urgent infrastructure spending?

On Thursday Obama showed up in Ohio again and this time used a bridge over the Ohio River as a backdrop for his calls for more urgent ("pass this bill now") stimulus spending. Two points to keep in mind: 1. The bridge in question is not structurally unsound as the President claimed but traffic demands more lanes be added which are 2. already in the works but nowhere near "shovel ready."

What's more is that projects like this might be underway by now with money from the first stimulus if Obama hadn't used the money to prop up state governments and labor unions with billions of dollars that did next to nothing to create new jobs but did allow a steady flow of campaign contributions from those organizations back to the coffers of the Democrat Party.

GOP Senate Leader Mitch McConnell, who comes from Kentucky, was particularly incensed that Obama used the bridge to his home state for another phony photo-op:

“Yet two and a half years later, what do we have to show for it: politically-connected companies like Solyndra ended up with hundreds of millions in taxpayer-backed money, and bridges like the one the President’s at today still need to be fixed.

“It’s worth noting, in fact, that this one company blew through more taxpayer money than the first stimulus allocated for every road and bridge in the entire state of Kentucky — combined

...
“So we’ve heard these promises before, and I don’t think the President should expect anybody to fall for them again.

“I mean, how many stimulus bills do we have to pass before these bridges get fixed?

“How many Solyndras do we have to finance?

“How much money do we have to waste before the President makes good on the promises he’s already made?

“If a bridge needs fixing, by all means, let’s fix it.

“But don’t tell us we need to pass a half a trillion dollar stimulus bill and accept job-killing tax hikes to do it.

“Don’t tell the people of Kentucky they need to finance every turtle tunnel and solar panel company on some bureaucrat’s wish list in order to get their bridges fixed.

“And don’t patronize us by implying that if we just pass this second stimulus, that bridges will be fixed ‘right away.’

“The American people heard the same thing when the administration was selling the first stimulus, only to turn on their television sets two and a half years later to see the President having a big laugh over the fact that all those shovel-ready projects weren’t quite as shovel-ready as he thought they were.

“So I would suggest, Mr. President, that you think about ways to actually help the people of Kentucky and Ohio, instead of how you can use their roads and bridges as a backdrop for making a political point.

“If you’re truly interested in helping our state — if you really want to help our state — then come back to Washington and work with Republicans on legislation that will actually do something to revive our economy and create jobs. And forget the political theater."
Obama's actions have made it clear that he does not want a solution to the jobs problem. He only wants to cement his political argument in order to blame Republicans. The only job he cares about is his own!

Meanwhile, The Dow Jones Industrial Average has dropped nearly 800 points this week! Obama's phony jobs campaign isn't fooling anyone!

Thursday, September 22, 2011

Once Again: Taxing the Rich Will NOT Solve Fiscal Problem

But once again, Obama's demand for "fairness" is not about sound fiscal policy but about setting one group of Americans against another while laying the foundation for a massive socialist state!

On Tax Day, April 18th I posted "100% Tax on Rich Won't Solve Fiscal Crisis." I may be accused of repeating myself but since Obama has doubled down on the class warfare refrain it's a good idea to review the facts again:

As I said in that original post, the rich do not have enough money to pay all the bills Obama has run up. Take every penny those who make $200,000 or more per year and you barely cover Obama's deficit for one year:
Obama claims to be the class warrior on behalf of the Middle Class, but it's that income group that holds the lion's share of the money Obama needs to fund his socialist revolution.

And let's just repeat this one more time, or a hundred more times if need be: the problem is NOT that rich Americans are not paying their fair share (those who make over $113k pay 70% of income taxes)the problem is spending:

Obama's idea of "fairness" is to create a massive federal government with a never ending appetite for expansion at the expense of the entire private sector. His other poll tested phrase is "a balanced approach." But there is nothing balanced about the federal monster he wishes to create!

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Rick Perry Hits at "President Zero" in New Ad

Have you seen the light? Make sure to see the imagery at the end!

Mitt Romney's been at this longer than Rick Perry. One of Mitt's ads hit at Obama's comment that unemployment was a "bump in the road." It was a great ad and very effective. Opponents of Obama are looking for a fighter and the message conveyed in ads are an indication of the seriousness of a potential nominee to take the fight to Obama.

Now, Texas Governor Rick Perry has released his first web ad:


A solid start for Governor Perry! It pretty much ties Perry with Mitt in the all important ad wars which are a sign of the candidate's ability to enunciate a message to the American people.

Revolt of the White House Women

New book highlights how women in the Obama White House were marginalized, ignored and felt sexist tension from the Obama "Boys Club!"

So, get this...The Obama Administration gave full cooperation to Pulitzer Prize winning author Ron Suskind to do one of those behind the scenes books that clearly the Administration felt would be a useful piece of political propaganda. The book, "Confidence Men: Wall Street, Washington, and the Education of a President," [Amazon] did turn out to be a useful piece of propaganda, but only for those on the right who had always viewed the Obama team with suspicion.

Photobucket
Romer: "I felt like a piec of meat."
First there were the more sensational charges like the quote from Christina Romer, former head of the Council of Economic Advisers. Ms. Romer is quoted as saying she "felt like a piece of meat." Anyone who has seen a photos of Ms. Romer (left) might have trouble believing that. Next was the quote by the Mao loving  former White House communications director Anita Dunn
who reportedly said that the Obama White House was a "genuinely hostile workplace to women." Dunn tried to deny saying this, but a recording of the quote was played for a reporter for the Washington Post.

Both women have distanced themselves from those comments but what hasn't gone away is the notion that the Obama White House is NOT a place where women feel respected and included. In fact, more and more stories are coming out to support the book's basic conclusions regarding the role of women in this White House. The headlines tell the story: "In early Obama White House, female staffers felt frozen out" in the Washington Post. "White House Women Revolt" in the Daily Beast and "The White House Boys’ Club: President Obama Has a Woman Problem" at Time Magazine.

That last article, written by Amy Sullivan, describes how she has chronicled the sorry role women have played in the Obama White House by reading the body language of photographs of Obama when meeting with his female staff and the easy camaraderie of him with his male colleagues. One photo in particular makes her case:

White House Women NOT Happy Campers!
Amy Sullivan: "Look at the senior women meeting with Obama in this White House photo at a dinner they called to discuss their invisibility. Look at their faces and body language. They are pissed off."
The first time I noticed something was awry, I was flipping through the White House Flickr album from Obama’s first 100 days in office. About halfway through, I realized something was missing. Shot after shot showed Oval Office meetings filled with men in dark suits. But apart from occasional appearances by Hillary Clinton and Valerie Jarrett–and one photo of an Oval Office meeting that included Jarrett and several other female advisers–women were mostly absent from the workplace shots.

I knew the problem wasn’t a lack of women on staff at the White House. A 2009 analysis of White House salary data did find that while women outnumbered men in the lowest salary brackets, there were only 58 women in the 142 highest senior staff positions at the Obama White House. But those 58 were still a huge leap over the 32 highly-paid women in George W. Bush’s White House in 2007. Even so, it didn’t matter how many senior women were on staff if they weren’t in the room with the boss when it mattered. There, a comparison with Bush’s White House is also instructive. Valerie Jarrett is obviously a key member of Obama’s inner circle, but her role is largely a personal one, to protect Obama’s brand. For the most part, she does not fill the same position of political or policy guru that Karen Hughes and Condi Rice respectively did in Bush’s brain trust.
Has hell frozen over or did a member of the mainstream media actually give former President Bush a compliment for the role he gave women in his inner circle?

The problem in the Obama White House appears to be deep seated in Obama's own personality. Amy Sullivan continues:
Even when women are in the room with Obama, they are sometimes seen but not heard. At a 2010 symposium on women in finance, Christina Romer, then the chair of Obama’s Council of Economic Advisors, talked about the difficulty she had getting the floor in policy discussions. Suskind relates the story of how Obama reacted angrily to one suggestion by Romer, and yet calmly heard out the same point from Larry Summers a few days later. Other senior women have complained that their arguments seemed to disappear into the ether at meetings, unacknowledged by Obama. Ellen Moran, Obama’s first communications director, was the first member of his team to leave the White House, resigning just 92 days into the term.

These complaints will ring familiar to most professional women. And we know that the difference between temporary annoyances and an intolerable situation is a boss who acknowledges the issue and moves quickly to address it. Yet it seems to have taken several years for Obama to pay even minimal attention to the problem.
No Surprise

Those who expected Obama to be a different kind of president and who bought the hope and change bunk are bound to be disappointed for a whole host of reasons. Obama's dismissal of women is just the latest. Hispanics thought Obama was going to pave the way for immigration amnesty. African Americans like Peggy Joseph thought Obama was going to put gas in her car and help pay off her mortgage. Liberal women thinking Obama would treat them with the respect they feel they deserve have only themselves to blame for drinking the Kool Aid in the first place!

Monday, September 19, 2011

No Surprise Here: Obama Calls for MASSIVE Tax Increase to Pay for More Wasteful Spending

Does three dollars in tax increases for every one dollar of cuts that will never happen  sound like a "balanced approach?"

By now you know Obama is running around the country repeating his "pass this bill now" mantra. This is for a bill that wasn't even written when he started making the demand and apparently won't even be acted on by the Senate until October (see below).

Recall also that Obama said he would tell us later how he intended to pay for the bill. That too should have been a sign that politics, not serious legislation, was the point of this exercise.

Today, the day arrived when he learned how Obama intended to pay for the bill. It won't surprise anyone. From the Washington Times:
President Obama on Monday proposed a deficit reduction plan that calls for about $3 in new tax increases for every dollar in additional spending cuts as he seeks to put his imprint on the ongoing talks with Congress over reducing the government’s staggering debt.

In a plan his advisers described as his ideological vision rather than a compromise offer to Hill Republicans, Mr. Obama also threatened to veto any plan Congress sends him that makes changes to Medicare benefits without also raising taxes on the wealthy, which he argues is central to a “balanced” approach.
...
Mr. Obama said his plan calls for $2 in cuts for every $1 in tax increases, but he reaches that by re-counting cuts already in law or in the planning pipeline, and by factoring in lower debt service costs.
Phony accounting gimmicks and phantom cuts that will never happen. We've all seen this movie before and we know how it ends.

Obama continues to repeat the poll tested phrase "a balanced approach" to describe his program. But calling it that doesn't make it so. Obama knows this massive tax increase won't pass either the House or the Senate. it's a joke, but not a funny one. When Americans are looking for leadership to address serious economic difficulties Obama answers with another political move designed to appeal to his base, reward his friends and "punish" his enemies.

If you needed more of a hint that his is all one giant political scam, the number two Democrat in the U.S. Senate is now saying that the Senate will go on vacation and not take up Obama's emergency "pass this bill NOW" legislation until sometime next month!

But meanwhile, that won't stop the Democrats have blasting Republicans for blocking Obama's "jobs" bill!

Sunday, September 18, 2011

Democrats Won't "Pass this bill now!"

How does Obama get away with blaming Republicans for putting "party ahead of country" when more and more Democrats are opposed to his failed policies?

Readers may recall Obama's big time speech before a Joint Session of Congress where he repeatedly demanded that Congress "pass this bill now." CBS is out with a video montage if you missed the speech. After the speech, Obama took his "pass this bill" show on the road in a series of speeches where he repeated some variation of the phrase.

Put aside for a moment that Obama took two weeks vacation before returning to Congress to urge immediate passage of a bill that had yet to be written when he made his speech. The problem now is that the "bill" which appears to be a cobbling together of every idea that Obama could not get passed through the House and Senate when his party had unchallenged majorities in the previous two years hasn't even been introduced into either legislative body.

Democrats have not been rushing forward to sponsor Obama's bill and no action can take place until they do. Worse still, a number of Democrats have come out in opposition to the bill. The New York Times put together a partial list.

And in the Senate, the Majority Leader Harry Reid (another Democrat) has put legislation regarding bike paths ahead of any action on Obama's jobs bill.

Let's keep an eye out this coming week for any introduction of Obama's bill. But for now it seems like the only urgency on the part of Democrats is for a POLITICAL strategy to blame Republicans not legislation that would actually benefit the American people!

Obama Fundraiser Played Key Role in Program to Dole Out $25 Billion in Loans. Many to Obama Friends?

Pay to play, it's the Chicago way!

We're already beginning to learn more about the direct links between the Obama Administration and the failed Solyndra project with the potential loss of up to $527 million in taxpayer funds. Political pressure from the White House to approve the loan which heavily favored an Obama campaign contributor has yet to be explained.

Now we learn that  Steve Spinner, a top Obama fundraiser in 2008, played a key role at the Dept. of Energy passing out $25 billion in other loans. After passing out the goodies, Spinner left DOE and is now shaking down firms which may have been on the receiving end of federal funds.

The L.A. Times reports that:
Spinner, who raised at least $500,000 for Obama in 2008, is leading efforts to raise money from the technology industry for the president's reelection campaign. He did not respond to requests for comment Friday.

Last week, he invited Obama fundraisers who were in Chicago for a national finance committee meeting to the launch of the Technology for Obama fundraising program. In July, the Obama campaign credited Spinner with raising between $200,000 and $500,000 so far this year.

Spinner was a Silicon Valley investor who founded a sports and wellness company before he joined the administration in April 2009 after serving on Obama's transition team. He was named an advisor to Energy Secretary Steven Chu and was charged with helping oversee a loan guarantee program authorized by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the economic stimulus program.
Those who referred to the Stimulus bill as a massive political slush fund were not far off the mark. The only jobs that appear to have been created are for rich Obama cronies and their friends.

Try as hard as they can, the Obama Administration will not be able to keep the appearance of gross impropriety buried under the rug much longer. With billions wasted and little or nothing to show for it American taxpayers will demand answers. Whether they get them or not is another story!

Saturday, September 17, 2011

Happy Birthday U.S. Constitution!

It's a very special day for lovers of freedom in the most exceptional country on earth!

Photobucket

From the National Archives:
On September 17, 1787, a majority of the delegates to the Constitutional Convention approved the documents over which they had labored since May. After a farewell banquet, delegates swiftly returned to their homes to organize support, most for but some against the proposed charter. Before the Constitution could become the law of the land, it would have to withstand public scrutiny and debate. The document was "laid before the United States in Congress assembled" on September 20. For 2 days, September 26 and 27, Congress debated whether to censure the delegates to the Constitutional Convention for exceeding their authority by creating a new form of government instead of simply revising the Articles of Confederation. They decided to drop the matter. Instead, on September 28, Congress directed the state legislatures to call ratification conventions in each state. Article VII stipulated that nine states had to ratify the Constitution for it to go into effect. \
...
It took 10 months for the first nine states to approve the Constitution. The first state to ratify was Delaware, on December 7, 1787, by a unanimous vote, 30 - 0. The featured document is an endorsed ratification of the federal Constitution by the Delaware convention. The names of the state deputies are listed, probably in the hand of a clerk. The signature of the President of Delaware's convention, Thomas Collins, attests to the validity of the document, which also carries the state seal in its left margin. Delaware's speediness thwarted Pennsylvania's attempt to be first to ratify in the hope of securing the seat of the National Government in Pennsylvania.

The first real test for ratification occurred in Massachusetts, where the fully recorded debates reveal that the recommendation for a bill of rights proved to be a remedy for the logjam in the ratifying convention. New Hampshire became the ninth state to approve the Constitution in June, but the key States of Virginia and New York were locked in bitter debates. Their failure to ratify would reduce the new union by two large, populated, wealthy states, and would geographically splinter it. The Federalists prevailed, however, and Virginia and New York narrowly approved the Constitution. When a bill of rights was proposed in Congress in 1789, North Carolina ratified the Constitution. Finally, Rhode Island, which had rejected the Constitution in March 1788 by popular referendum, called a ratifying convention in 1790 as specified by the Constitutional Convention. Faced with threatened treatment as a foreign government, it ratified the Constitution by the narrowest margin (two votes) on May 29, 1790.
Rhode Island's narrow two vote margin in favor of ratification may have been just a foretaste of the close elections in the years to come!

A Personal Story

Hillsdale College is sponsoring a daylong seminar on the U.S. Constitution, but I'd rather tell a personal story.

In 1988 when I worked in the Reagan White House I was leaving the Old Executive Office Building on September 17th and just happened to notice Chief Justice Warren Burger of the U.S. Supreme Court waiting on a Washington street for his car. The Chief Justice was a big backer of celebrations honoring the U.S. Constituion and it turns out his birthday is on the same day. I walked past and wished him a "Happy Birthday." It so happens that the 17th is my birthday as well and I was pleased to be in such good company as the Chief Justice and the Constitution!

Friday, September 16, 2011

Political Corruption Goes Hand in Hand with Billions Wasted in Obama's Green Jobs Fiasco

If Bush were in office a Special Prosecutor would already be working on the case!


Creating jobs is necessary for pulling the US out of this slump, but if the jobs created will cost millions in additional training, they may not be the smartest investment. The Obama administration is wrought with examples of this. In the case of green energy, many of these jobs will force people to receive advanced training. While online graduate programs are available, student loan debt is crushing this country and forcing people to take on more of it is not exactly the stimulus we were promised. Neither was Solyndra.

The deeper we dig into the Solyndra scandal the more we find the fingerprints of officials at the very top of the Obama White House personally rushing the project with political considerations always in the minds of those working on the issue.

We already know that Solyndra was backed by a top Obama fundraiser and that company executives met at the White House at least 20 times. We don't now yet what happened in those meetings but now emails and documents among the various officials working on Solyndra are starting to come out and they tell much of the story.

Meanwhile, the Obama Administration, as usual, is trying to point the finger of blame at President Bush. But the very first document in the Solyndra document file points to a refusal by Bush era officials to approve the loan guarantee and points to a number of serious unresolved issues. On January 13th Lachlan Seward, a key official in the Department of Energy (DOE) loan guarantee program wrote: "after canvassing the [credit] committee it was the unanimous decision not to engage in further discussions with Solyndra at this time." So much for the "it's Bush's fault" argument!

All the concerns which came to light at the end of the Bush Administration were swept away by the incoming Obama Administration. A DOE email from March 10, 2009 (page four) shows how paramount political considerations had become, but also repeats the warnings which were ignored:
"DOE is trying to deliver the first loan guarantee within 60 days of the inauguration (the prior administration could not get it done in four years). This deal is NOT ready for prime time."
On page five, another email on March 10, 2009 links approval of the loan to Obama's visit to California on March 19. This is the first of many cross links between White House political needs and Solyndra.

Later in August 2009 the emails among DOE/OMB officials revealed the incredible pressure they were getting to finish work on the Solyndra loans. On August 31 (page 12) one OMB official complained that the announcement was driving the decision making process: "we would prefer to have sufficient time to do our due diligence reviews and have the approval set the date rather than the other way around."

On Tuesday, September 13, the White House pushed back against evidence of political pressure. But the Washington Post report shows examples of just what kind of pressure top White House officials did exert:
In one e-mail, an assistant to Rahm Emanuel, then White House chief of staff, wrote on Aug. 31, 2009, to OMB about the upcoming Biden announcement on Solyndra and asked whether “there is anything we can help speed along on OMB side.”

An OMB staff member responded: “I would prefer that this announcement be postponed. . . . This is the first loan guarantee and we should have full review with all hands on deck to make sure we get it right.”
This email (page 18) from an Office of Management and Budget official on January 31, 2011 highlights how political concerns continued to be at the forefront of Solydra concerns:
“Given the PR and policy attention that Solyndra has received since 2009, the optics of a Solyndra default will be bad whenever it occurs. If Solyndra defaults down the road, the optics will be arguably worse later than they would be today...Questions will be asked why the Administration made bad investments not just once... but twice (which could easily be portrayed as bad judgement or worse).
Once again highlighting the political nature of the issue this official went on to warn that the expected default “would likely coincide with the 2012 campaign season heating up.”

Failure of Obama's Green Jobs Agenda will cost BILLIONS!

Obama defenders might say of the Solyndra collapse "So what? It's only half a billion dollars." If only the amount wasted were that small.

The loan program run by the Department of Energy for so-called "green jobs" totals $38.5 BILLION. It was supposed to "create or save" up to 65,000 jobs. But the Washington Post reports that after giving out half the total amount only "3,545 new, permanent jobs" have been created. That's $5.4 million PER JOB. That's an even bigger scandal than the Solyndra collapse.

Over 1,000 jobs at Solyndra were lost when the firm closed it's doors. I'm not sure that counts in the current DOE tally. But Solyndra isn't the only green jobs firm that got Stimulus money and went bankrupt. There are at least two more both small potatoes when compared with the $500 million loss at Solyndra but further proof of waste of taxpayer money raising more questions about the ability and the desirability of the government picking winners and losers in the marketplace.

Obama's Favorite Wall Street Firm Goldman Sachs Big Winner

When Obama said he would "reward our friends and punish our enemies" he wasn't kidding. The big Wall Street brokerage firm Goldman Sachs was the second biggest PAC donor to Obama's 2008 campaign. I guess it's no surprise that we find Goldman's fingers in the Solyndra pie when more than $500 million was at stake.

The Solyndra scandal shows a propensity for the Obama Administration to put political concerns ahead of sound financial management practices. Yet, Obama continues to berate Republicans for putting "party before country?" Anyone else see the problem here?


 OnlineGraduatePrograms supports and promotes this writing about higher education 

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Repudiation of Obama: GOP Wins Two Special Elections for House Seats

And the STUNNING upset in New York City recalls Scott Brown's win in Massachusetts!

Remember the famous words of Abraham Lincoln: "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time." Well, apparently fewer and fewer people are being fooled by Barack Hussein Obama!

Results in Tuesday's special election for House seats in New York and Nevada show that the political tide which repudiated Obama in the November 2011 midterm election has not abated. If anything, it is getting stronger.

The most upsetting of these twin disappointments for Democrats is the loss of the seat in New York which has been in Democrat hands for nearly one hundred years and was the political base of Congresswoman Geraldine Ferraro, Senator Chuck Schumer and the disgraced Rep. Anthony Weiner.

But the vote in NY-9 was more than registering disgust with Weiner's bizarre behavior. Obama carried the district by 11 points. Now, Obama's popularity in the district which has a three to one advantage in registered Democrats is in the dumps. Much of that is due to the Jewish vote, but also there was a new enthusiasm in the district where voters who previously had not worked in campaigns were excited by the opportunity to get involved and send a message to Obama. Boy did they!

A Tea Party Triumph!

Democrat candidate David Weprin tried to make the Tea Party the boogie man in the race. He repeatedly tried to smear the Tea Party and his opponent  Bob Turner with the vile rhetoric that has become commonplace in leading Democrat circles. At one point Weprin said "My opponent is identified with the Tea Party element of the Republican Party, that clearly has held our country hostage." This effort reached absurd lows in this press release from the Weprin campaign blaming the Tea Party and GOP candidate Turner for the debt downgrade.

If tactics to scare voters with the Tea Party bogeyman didn't work in New York City, they won't work in Ohio, Virginia or other swing states in 2012.

And 2012 IS what this election was all about. "I am the messenger," Turner said as he claimed his victory. "This message . . . will reverberate into 2012."

Amen to that!

Monday, September 12, 2011

Social Security is Not a Ponzi Scheme. IT'S WORSE!

Ponzi schemes are voluntary. Social Security is NOT!

Texas Governor Rick Perry is taking a lot of heat for standing by his view that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme when everyone who is honest about the issue knows he is telling the truth and then some.

An excellent article by Stanley Kurtz in National Review recounts some of the history of the use of the phrase "Ponzi Scheme" to describe Social Security. What's amazing is that both liberals and conservatives have used that phrase repeatedly going back to at least 1967.

Now, all of a sudden Governor Perry expresses the same idea and many of these folks leap up in outrage to condemn him? Can we say "hypocrisy?"Is there any chance we Americans will be able to honestly address issues of such huge importance as Social Security when political demagoguery and hypocrisy rule the day? I doubt it!

Saturday, September 10, 2011

Tens Years Since 9/11: We Will Not Forget the Attacks and the Sacrifice of Those Who Keep Us Safe Today

It's only been ten years? The world has changed so much it seems like a thousand!

With the memory and true meaning of that awful day in September 2001 becoming polluted by cultural relativism and political correctness (see Mark Steyn's column and Yoko Ono's "Wish Tree" for world peace)it's important to remember what really happened and how it changed the lives of everyone in this country.

And as we remember the events of that awful day, the great loss of life and the tragic heroism of so many, let us not forget the many thousands of heroes since who have sacrificed so much to keep us safe and continue to do their best to prevent such a calamity from happening again. Whether that is the cop on his beat staying alert to new threats, or the soldier overseas working to clean out terrorist hot spots or the intelligence agents and analysts who gather the information that helps us keep one step ahead.

With that in mind, here are a few photo reflections, starting in the present:

President Bush's Silent Tribute at Pentagon Says More Than Words Could Convey

Former President Bush and First Lady Laura Bush attended a brief ceremony at the Pentagon and laid a wreathe at the site where the plane on September 11, 2001 struck the building. He made no speech yet the message on his face and that of the First Lady were more compelling and sincere than any words read off a teleprompter:
Photobucket
Former US First Lady Laura Bush and former US President George W. Bush attend a wreath laying ceremony on September 10, 2011 at the impact point of Flight 77 at the Pentagon.
Looking Back in Photos:

Taken by Mike's America during the Centennial of the Statue of Liberty. The Twin Towers are part of the iconic cityscape of New York for decades. I recall the times when I drove up the New Jersey Turnpike headed back to the city and when I saw the Towers in the distance, I knew I was almost home.

Thursday, September 08, 2011

The King's Speech

Obama could win an Academy Award for chutzpah in his campaign kickoff address before Congress!

Roll together all the familiar recycled rhetoric with it's partisan tone, fingerpointing, straw men arguments, failed policies of tax and spend and you have the recipe for Obama's empty suit speech before a Joint Session of Congress Thursday evening.

But beside all these familiar devices Obama introduced something new. No longer is he asking for an immediate vote on a bill thousands of pages long that no one has read. Now he wants Congress to pass a bill that hasn't even been written.

Counting from the official White House transcript, President Obama used some variation of the phrase "pass this bill" eighteen times during the address. Yet, as I said there is no bill to pass. Just some rather vague ideas for more spending and another visit to the well of class warfare with demands for higher taxes.

And it was this dig at the wealthy who already pay 70% of income taxes "to pay their fair share," which was the only suggestion for how to pay for the approximately $450 billion in new spending, much of it directed to purposes that benefit Obama's big labor backers. I guess it was no coincidence that AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka was sitting in the First Lady's box next to Michelle Obama.

Obama's proposal to pay for the majority of his vague plan is to dump the cost onto the deficit reduction Super Committee which is already hard pressed to find a way to cut $1.5 trillion from the federal budget.

Unless of course the Super Committee wants to recommend the abolition of ObamaCare and the trillions in new spending it entails, there is no way to pay another $450 billion for this latest rehash of failed Obama stimulus.

Both Republicans and Democrats in Congress would be foolish to buy another pig in a poke from Obama considering the performance we have seen from past Obama efforts.

Senator Mitch McConnell: "Insane" to support more failed stimulus

In a speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate Thursday afternoon, Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell said:
[I]n a two-party system like ours, it shouldn’t be surprising that there would be two very different points of view about how to solve this particular crisis. What is surprising is the President’s apparent determination to apply the same government-driven policies that have already been tried and failed. The definition of insanity, as Albert Einstein once famously put it, is to do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result. Frankly, I can’t think of a better description of anyone who thinks the solution to this problem is another Stimulus. The first Stimulus didn’t do it. Why would another one?

“This is one question that the White House and a number of Democrats clearly don’t want to answer. That’s why some of them are out there coaching people not to use the word Stimulus when describing the President’s plan. Others are accusing anybody who criticizes it of being unpatriotic or playing politics. Well, as I’ve said, there’s a much simpler reason to oppose the President’s economic policies that has nothing whatsoever to do with politics: they don’t work. Yet, by all accounts, the President’s so-called jobs plan is to try those very same policies again, and then accuse anyone who doesn’t support them this time around of being political or overly partisan, of not doing what’s needed in this moment of crisis.

“This isn’t a jobs plan. It’s a re-election plan. That’s why Republicans will continue to press for policies that empower job creators, not Washington.
This speech was about one job only: re-electing Obama!

Newt's Shining Moment at Reagan Library Debate

Newt knows media is working to help Obama by sowing conflict in GOP primary process!

In the debate at the Reagan Library among GOP presidential hopefuls Speaker Newt refused to be drawn in to the media attempt to create a feeding frenzy targeting Texas Governor Rick Perry. In an early question Newt was asked to explain writing a forward praising Perry's book "Fed Up." Newt didn't take the bait and responded, "if he wants to write another book, I'll write another foreword."

But Newt really got fired up later. In an attempt to draw Newt into criticizing Perry and Romney, the former Speaker reacted very strongly:

Newt Gingrich to moderator John Harris of Politico: "I am frankly not interested in your effort to get Republicans fighting with each other...I for one and I hope that all of my friends up here are going to repudiate every effort of the news media to get Republicans to fight each other, to protect Barack Obama who deserves to be defeated. And all of us are committed as a team. Whoever the nominee is, we are all for defeating Barack Obama."

Obama's "Green Jobs" Pet Project Collapse Now Target of FBI Investigation

What was White House connection to company backed by major Obama contributor?

Two bits of news in the wake of the collapse of Solyndra (hailed by Obama as our green future):

1. The FBI raided Solyndra headquarters on Thursday. No word on the reason.
2. Solyndra investors, including a top Obama contributor made at least 20 trips to the White House for various meetings with Administration personnel.

Now that Solyndra has declared bankruptcy and will likely be unable to repay the $527 million in loans guaranteed by the federal government, will the FBI investigation also include possible corruption by White House officials?

Don't bet on it. But you know that if a Republican were in office there would already be a Special Prosecutor on the case!

Perry Gets Put in the Crosshairs by Media in Reagan Library Debate

This is  only the beginning of the "Palin Treatment" media has in store for Perry!

Photobucket
Michelle Bachmann stands by as Perry and Romney dominate the debate.

Ten days ago I posted that Texas Governor Rick Perry was about to get the Palin Treatment by the "same reporters who STILL won't ask critical questions about Obama."

PhotobucketBut even I was surprised at the transparent willingness of NBC's Brian Williams and Politico's John Harris to carry the water for Obama by seeking to damage Perry in this debate. Sure, it was expected that the new frontrunner in his first debate would face scrutiny above that directed at the other candidates but the tone and level of the attack was surprising.

For an indication of the level of attention given to Perry I examined the transcript of the debate and found his name mentioned 55 times. Romney was next with 38 and Bachmann trailing at 22 which is only somewhat more than the other remaining candidates. At page right see the  Wordle of the top 50 words from the debate. Size of the word in the graphic indicates it's frequency in the transcript.


Perry managed to field the biased and negative questions with little difficulty but the sad story is that few Americans watched the debate yet you can bet subsequent news reports of the event, which will be more widely viewed, will focus on the biased questions and less so on Perry's answers.

There were one or two difficult questions for Mitt Romney but it is pretty obvious by now that the left leaning media in this country would prefer Romney as the GOP nominee. Perhaps in the same way and for the same reasons they preferred McCain in 2008. Easier for Obama to beat!

This is just a taste of what the eventual GOP nominee will face in debates with Obama who will likely continue to receive special treatment from his friends and well-wishers in the "news" media!

Wednesday, September 07, 2011

Viewing Aid for Obama's Big Jobs Speech

Print this chart out and place alongside your television as a reminder of the reality of failed Obama jobs programs. Do we really need MORE of this?

Here's a version of the same chart Obama used to sell his $787 billion Stimulus package. Only this one shows what REALLY happened after all that money was wasted on payoffs to Obama's big government, big labor supporters:

Photobucket

Unemployment is 2.7% higher than Obama projected with 6.4 million fewer jobs.

Republican Jobs Agenda Blocked by Dems who DO Put Party Before Country

One theme Obama has repeated in recent speeches on jobs and one that he is likely to repeat on Thursday is the idea that those who disagree with his failed policies and are advancing a different program for job creation are somehow "putting party before country."

Well, frequent visitors to the website for House Speaker John Boehner are well acquainted with the multitude of legislative initiatives passed by the U.S. House of Representatives to address the jobs crisis. The problem is that most of this legislation has been blocked by President Obama's Democrat allies in the U.S. Senate. Senate Dems are hanging tough to defend the same big government big labor interests at the expense of the American people.

In the following letter dated September 6, House Speaker Boehner and Majority Leader Cantor write to President Obama describing some of the many efforts that have been undertaken by the House to create jobs. But pay special attention to page four where Boehner and Cantor list the House passed legislation that has been blocked in the Senate:

In Letter to President Obama, Speaker Boehner & Leader Cantor Highlight Jobs Bills Stalled in Democrat-Led ...

Now, is it un-American, or as Obama suggests "putting party before country" to want to stop what is not working and try something else? Who is really playing politics at a time when Americans who are out of work need leadership?

Tuesday, September 06, 2011

Obama's Actions Invite Disrespect

He can't blame this one on the Tea Party!

Writing at the Washington Post, columnist Jonathon Capehart described the "kerfufle" over Obama's request to speak before a Joint Session of Congress as symptomatic of a greater disrespect by Repubicans for the Office of President. Capehart went on to suggest that while Democrats were sharply critical of President Bush they never disrespected the office. Who does this man think he is fooling by writing such tripe?

On the subject of Obama's speech request, Michael Barone had this to say:
Obama's request was regarded as a clever move by some wiseguys in the left blogosphere because that was the exact time of a long-scheduled Republican presidential candidate debate at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library. Take that, you guys!
...
Before last week, presidents and congressional leaders always agreed privately on scheduling presidential addresses to joint sessions before any public announcement was made. But it appears that no such agreement was made here, just a brusque announcement that had to be retracted.

Another weakness on display was contempt for public opinion. White House press secretary Jay Carney said it was just "coincidental" that the president wanted to speak at the same time as the debate. It was just "one debate of many that's on one channel of many."

But those with memories that go back beyond last week may recall that in May 2009, Obama scrambled to find a venue for a speech at exactly the same time as former Vice President Dick Cheney was scheduled to speak at the American Enterprise Institute on detainee questioning issues. Cheney coolly watched Obama on television and then delivered his own speech.

Ham-handedly trying to bigfoot the opposition is a habit with this president, not a coincidence.
...
Democrats have criticized Obama on the speech-scheduling flap. James Carville said he was "out of bounds." Salon.com's Cenk Uygur sensed "the audacity of weakness." It reminds me of a phrase describing a character in the 1980s TV series "Dallas" -- "blustering, opportunistic, craven and hopelessly ineffective all at once."
Readers may note that yours truly earlier zeroed in on Obama's 2009 effort to upstage Dick Cheney. That too backfired but in the Obama White House there is no shortage of hubris and apparently no desire to learn from their mistakes.

In this latest case, Obama created the problem by knowingly going up against the GOP debate and scheduling his speech without due consultation with congress. If anyone is being disrespectful, it is Obama dissing the House of Representatives and GOP presidential hopefuls. If the White House was unaware of the GOP debate conflict then they are even more incompetent than we thought.

Now back to Capehart's column in the Post:
In Obama, we have a president more grounded and comfortable in his own skin than many of the people he has to work with to govern this country. He’s bigger than most of us. So the petty slights that get a lot of us riled up probably don’t register to him. He’s a thinker and plotter with his eyes on the prize down the road, not the daily hysteria taking place on the road to get there. That’s why I’m praying that when the real fight comes, the president will show Republicans — and the American people — that he’s not the pushover they believe him to be.
From here on out when we talk about liberal Kool Aid drinkers we should include a copy of Capehart's picture. If the people in the White House have views that are as out of touch with reality as those of Capehart's then Obama may be in bigger trouble than we thought. GOOD!

Monday, September 05, 2011

Happy Labor Day!

Why do unions get a federal holiday when so many Americans are unemployed?

If there was ever a holiday that was a blank excuse to go to the beach without further contemplation of the reason for the day it is Labor Day. On Memorial Day we reflect on our fallen heroes. July 4th is a day to remember our fight for Independence. Labor Day is something labor unions dreamed up to get another day off to do what they do best: organize for more money and gripe!

But take a moment off from your picnic or the beach and reflect on what Labor Unions are doing to modern day America. No longer does Big Labor stand up for the little guy. Big Labor looks out for Big Labor and their allies in the Democrat Party. That's what the fight in Wisconsin earlier this year was all about. Take away the power of unions to compel workers to join and to force them to contribute to the Democrat Party via union dues and that spells trouble for the fat cats. A report by the Center for Public Integrity lists some of the huge salaries and perks of union executives that Big Labor is trying to protect while funneling millions to Democrats.


New Labor is "Anti-Jobs!"

Steve Huntley, writing in the Chicago Sun Times describes his union experience:
In another job, with another employer, at another time many years ago, I was a union activist. I edited a union newspaper, recruited new members and promoted the union whenever I could. Then I became its grievance chairman.

For 2½ years I spent 95 percent of my union-work time defending the incompetents, the lazy, the malingers and the malcontents. And they got paid the same as my fellow workers who showed up every day and gave their all to the job. What’s more, I saw how union rules frustrated management innovations to improve our journalistic product.
...
I don’t say there are no places where unions wouldn’t be good. But if deplorable working conditions and exploitative bosses were common, unions would have no trouble finding brave men and women to advance the union cause. That’s not the case. Workers see how unions have undermined the competitiveness of industries — think of the once Big Three automakers — and eroded long-term job security.

Huntley goes on to cite how Big Labor, allied with the National Labor Relations Board, packed with Obama cronies, is actually making the employment situation worse by attacking firms like Boeing who wants to set up a new jet manufacturing plant in South Carolina where compulsion to join a union is not sanctioned by the state.

Labor Unions are mostly an outdated relic of another era. But with millions of dollars for union executive salaries and Democrat campaign contributions at stake, this last Berlin Wall from the 20th Century is unlikely to fall anytime soon.

So, enjoy your day off from work. But don't thank unions for it!

Friday, September 02, 2011

Obama's Big ZERO Job Creation for August

Who will he blame this on?

First we had a Stimulus Bill that the Obama Administration promised would keep unemployment below 8%. In Spring 2010, Vice President Biden promsied a "Recovery Summer" with hundreds of thousands of new jobs every month. Now we learn that in August 2011 there was ZERO job growth and that the unemployment rate remains at 9.1%.

Obama has pointed the finger of blame at everyone but himself. At what point does he admit that many of his policies are actually hampering job growth?

Republicans in the House of Representatives led by Speaker Boehner have been pursuing an aggressive legislative agenda designed to get government off the backs of job creators and cut the increasing levels of red tape that is choking our economy. Yet nearly every measure put forward by House Republicans has been blocked by Democrats in the U.S. Senate.

Obama will give his big speech next Thursday to a Joint Session of Congress. No doubt we will hear more empty words about how Democrats and Republicans need to work together to solve the jobs crisis. Yet will we hear one word from Obama demanding that his fellow Democrats in the Senate allow legislation from the GOP House to come up for a vote? Don't bet on it.

More Jobs, Lower Gas Prices and Decrease Deficit in One Move NOW!

Forget green jobs. Furthering a green agenda is a recipe for additional decline and hardship. But there is one way to get job growth started immediately by lifting Obama's permit slowdown on new oil and gas development. Think about this:
The Wall Street Journal reports that, thanks to Obama's ban on deep-water drilling and his administration's subsequent slow-walking of permit applications, we are losing out on 375,000 barrels of oil per day. That's just over 2 percent of American consumption that simply vanished -- an amount that is more than enough to affect prices at the pump -- and about one-third of the daily production losses because of Libya's ongoing civil war.

At today's prices, the Obama-induced loss of production represents $40 million per day in lost oil revenue. Spread over a full year, that comes to $14.6 billion that could be supporting thousands of sustainable, good-paying American jobs at no cost to the taxpayer. That is a much better deal than Obama's $800 billion stimulus package, which appears to have added far more to the national debt than it ever will to national employment. It seems clear that ideological and not economic considerations are at work in this administration's energy policy. The same politician who once said that energy prices would "necessarily skyrocket" under his plan seems less intent on job creation or energy security than he is on putting oil producers in a regulatory straitjacket and browbeating Americans into accepting the lower standard of living that inevitably results from energy scarcity.
But anyone who expects Obama to reverse his Administration's clamp down on domestic oil production, regulatory overreach or Keynesian economics will be disappointed. He simply cannot let go of the left wing ideology that has been his soulmate in life. To do so would mean admitting that his policies are an utter failure. Something the rest of us realized a long time ago!

Another Failure of Obama's Jobs/Stimulus Program as Pet Green Jobs Company Shuts Doors

$527 million in federal backed loans lost to a company linked with Obama top campaign donor gives green jobs program a black eye!

As Obama prepares to give his latest jobs speech before a Joint Session of Congress next week, he's no doubt going to swing big for more "green jobs." Like these?

On May 26, 2010 President Obama stood inside the new Solyndra solar panel manufacturing facility in Fremont California to give a speech praising his Administration's efforts to create green jobs and restore America's manufacturing edge. The plant had opened after an emergency $535 million in loan guarantees made possible the Obama's Stimulus bill. At the close of his remarks, Obama said:
OBAMA: The future is here. We’re poised to transform the ways we power our homes and our cars and our businesses. And we’re poised to lead our competitors in the development of new technologies and products and businesses. And we are poised to generate countless new jobs, good-paying middle-class jobs, right here in the United States of America.

That’s the promise of clean energy. And thanks to the men and women here today -- and the innovators and the workers all across America -- it’s a promise that we’ve already begun to fulfill.
Earlier he spoke about Solyndra "leading the way toward a brighter and more prosperous future.” 15 months later the company layed off 1,000 workers, shut it's doors and file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Hundreds of millions in federal funds may be gone for good.

Brighter Future for Obama Campaign Contributors?

But the real scandal here isn't just the waste of taxpayer money and the fraud that is the false promise of green jobs but the possibility that political connections to a top Obama campaign donor might have been behind the ill-advised federal loan guarantee to Solyndra.

The Center for Public Integrity reports that one of Solyndra’s major investors was George Kaiser, an Oklahoma billionaire who raised between $50,000 and $100,000 for Obama during the 2008 election.

Not only was a major Obama donor involved in the project but there were irregularities with the speed and management of the loan guarantee process raising the spectre of political interference. Those questions were highlighted by a Government Accounting Office report which said that ") DOE's [Dept. of Energy] implementation of the LGP has treated applicants inconsistently, favoring some and disadvantaging others."

Such questions reinforce the already prevalent view that spending from the Stimulus Bill was used by the Obama Administration to reward their friends and punish their enemies.

What we have here is a new low. Not only a corrupt loan process but a jobs program that actually LOSES jobs!

2012 can't come soon enough. Let's send the Chicago mob back to the Windy City where it belongs!
fsg053d4.txt Free xml sitemap generator