"...this country was humming right along..."

Right, Feisty. All one has to do is look at the unemployment chart alone. But don't check the value of your 401 K's against that same date, though.....

"...this country was humming right along..."

Speaking of humming Buzz - any bets how long it is before your GF Smiffy shows up? ;op

Chu's next?

Unemployment you say Drive By? Well let's see Obama gave Solyndra $500 million and now there are 200 less people working.

Great plan. In fact all these solar panels are neat, too bad they will always be made cheaper in China.

Again, super well thought out jobs plan. What could go wrong?

Well, certainly due diligence was not done on background check for the Solyndra deal. In fact, it looks like safeguards put in to protect the taxpayers (safeguards no doubt put in place by the Bush administration) were ignored. Obama says that Solyndra got it's loan "Based on its merits", which means they had the right political connections.

Hey Fiesty can you say getting lawyered up, turning states evidence for a Special Prosecutor. Man things are so great in this country since the new hopey changey democrat took office. Herman says if you are envious of millionaires work harder. Heres typical "Fiesty The loan program started under President George W. Bush's administration" great info Fiesty and even though barry keep the program and loaned the money it was President George W. Bush's fault. *yawn* Can you come up with a new talking point for Barry's last year. Maybe lie and say something like, look what Barry did.

Surprising. Shouldn't this be in Crimes and Court section?

When is Holder resigning?

When a program was started is not the problem feisty, it is when it was willfully abused that upsets people.

Nice try at deflection, it is nice that MSNBC allows you to type your propaganda first.

Dear Feisty Red

The loan was considererd under the Bush administration because that was the administration to which Solyndra applied to for the loan. The loan was also shelved under the Bush administration, meaning that the Bush administration did not see fit to gamble taxpayer funds on this company. To that I say, thank you president Bush.

The loan was approved under the Obama administration against many advisers that warned Obama not to do so. The Obama administration also seems to have been close to one of the main investors in Solyndra as this individual was a bundler for campaign funds for obama. The Obama administration also changed the rules as to who gets what in the event of default, effectively moving the taxpayer to the end of the line. And finally, the Obama administration was preparing to loan yet another half billion to this company and all that stopped this second loan was the company went belly up.

Care to dispute these facts Feisty?

I am reading the emails now, wow this was blatant abuse of power for a crony. They disregarded rules, said they don't apply, need to check with general counsel, no you don't, we will waive that, all kinds of crap.

They willfully blew taxpayers money and now they come out with a bill asking for more and I am a racists for disagreeing.

Care to dispute these facts Feisty?

Sure why not...?

It's often claimed that the Solyndra loan guarantee was "rushed through" by the Obama Administration for political reasons. In fact, the Solyndra loan guarantee was a multi-year process that the Bush Administration launched in 2007.

You'd never know from the media coverage that

The Bush team tried to conditionally approve the Solyndra loan just before President Obama took office.

The company's backers included private investors who had diverse political interests.

The loan comprises just 1.3% of DOE's overall loan portfolio. To date, Solyndra is the only loan that's known to be troubled.

Because one of the Solyndra investors, Argonaut Venture Capital, is funded by George Kaiser — a man who donated money to the Obama campaign — the loan guarantee has been attacked as being political in nature. What critics don't mention is that one of the earliest and largest investors, Madrone Capital Partners, is funded by the family that started Wal-Mart, the Waltons. The Waltons have donated millions of dollars to Republican candidates over the years.

With a stagnant job market and Obama sinking in the polls, the media has decided on a narrative that matches right-wing talking points but not the facts. For instance, Bloomberg had this incredibly misleading headline yesterday, "Obama Team Backed $535 Million Solyndra Aid as Auditor Warned on Finances." If you replace "backed" with "touted," that would be accurate. But the headline makes it seem like the White House had decided to give $535 million to a company after an auditor had said it was financially troubled.

You have to read half the story to learn that the loan guarantee was made in 2009 and the audit was done in 2010 after market conditions had sharply worsened! And the Bloomberg story never explains that the company itself raised $250 million from private investors after the supposedly devastating audit

Source: Clean Technica (http://s.tt/13giD)

Oh, and, you most welcome to help yourself to the FACTS! ;o)

Read the emails Feisty or just chose to remain ignorant because it suits your agenda!

Read the emails Feisty

Link please?

http://www.foxbusiness.com/industries/2011/09/15/full-text-emails-from-solyndra-hearing/

Seriously - you provide a link to Fox? ROTFLMFAO!

Thanks, but I'll take a pass & prefer remain ignorant rather then duped by a phony 'news' station!

Any palm trees in WI on them or building that didn't exist? lol

So Feisty,

Which of the following are you actually disagreeing with?

The loan was approved under the Obama administration against many advisers that warned Obama not to do so

or

The Obama administration also seems to have been close to one of the main investors in Solyndra

or

The Obama administration also changed the rules as to who gets what in the event of default, effectively moving the taxpayer to the end of the line

or

The Obama administration was preparing to loan yet another half billion to this company and all that stopped this second loan was the company went belly up.

With all the noise and unsolicited data dump in your reply, I did not actually see you dispute any one of these. Is that correct?

On January 13, 2009, no Obama yet, there was a unanimous decision not to engage in any further conversations with Solyndra.

So even the man you think was an idiot, knew it was bad! And guess what the new guys new it was bad to.

But they did not care! They did not care. We need to do this during the time the bad unemployment numbers come out so we can tout what we are doing.

Yes, we know it is bad, but we don't care. Nice F*cking President, just like he did not care when Rezco screwed poor people, as long as he got a bigger yard, he did not care!

The man is scum!

Okay party shill use google to see what a scumbag the man you support is.

How could a true liberal stand the stench this man brings, he willfully stole from us, he let a felon screw poor people.

Okay party shill use google to see what a scumbag the man you support is.

There you have it - can't debate rationally so let the name calling begin...

You're dismissed sweetie! ;o)

Obama/Biden 2012!

You are afraid to face facts. Any sincere person would be disgusted if they read these emails. You willfully chose not to, there fore you are a party hack.

Have fun defending a person that knowingly stole $535,000,000 from our citizens who are suffering.

A rational debate happens when both parties have the facts, you chose to keep blinders on and be irresponsible. That is gross.

Dear Feisty,

You can always tell when someone has lost the argument - they have to resort to personal attacks!

I agree. Personal attacks hinder the open dialogue that is needed. Both political sides of the debate should stop doing this. And when a union leader stands up and says that the members of the TeaParty "should be taken out", that union leader just turned into a thug.

"Taken Out" is a commonly used term in the military to shoot the bad guy. Same for domestic police departments , ATF, FBI, etc. Yet I did not hear anyone stand up at that Obama rally and take offense to what I see as a very dangerous turn in our politics, which was basically, "If you do not give me what I want, I will kill you".

This sort of rhetoric has no place in a civilized society, let alone in a free society that prides itself on our American values of freedom of speech. Yet this is where Obama's class warfare and playing one faction against the other is leading this country.

As to your statement, I will add this.

You can also tell when someone has lost the argument when they leave the debate. Again I ask, which of the statements do you disagree with.

One other question Feisty.

Just how exactly did you change your post after it was posted? Are you somehow involved in the running of this site? If not, how did you drop the line

You can always tell when someone has lost the argument - they have to resort to personal attacks!

from your 1.19 post?

And she believes that these e-mails might not be true because they were posted on Fox!? Her attitude is "forget the facts" if they don't support your arguement!



Let's see, those e-mails were not the White House e-mails, they were from a committee hearing and the very first one was undated. Some of the e-mails had a date that was prior to President Obama's inaugeration, which would actually back up what Feisty posted. They prove nothing and do nothing to dispute what Feisty posted.

Here is what Feisty posted, again, so try and dispute what is here rather than just going after Feisty. Instead of attacking Feisty or repeating the same lies and wishful thinking you have already posted, dispute it, if you can:

It's often claimed that the Solyndra loan guarantee was "rushed through" by the Obama Administration for political reasons. In fact, the Solyndra loan guarantee was a multi-year process that the Bush Administration launched in 2007.

You'd never know from the media coverage that

The Bush team tried to conditionally approve the Solyndra loan just before President Obama took office.

The company's backers included private investors who had diverse political interests.

The loan comprises just 1.3% of DOE's overall loan portfolio. To date, Solyndra is the only loan that's known to be troubled.

Because one of the Solyndra investors, Argonaut Venture Capital, is funded by George Kaiser — a man who donated money to the Obama campaign — the loan guarantee has been attacked as being political in nature. What critics don't mention is that one of the earliest and largest investors, Madrone Capital Partners, is funded by the family that started Wal-Mart, the Waltons. The Waltons have donated millions of dollars to Republican candidates over the years.

With a stagnant job market and Obama sinking in the polls, the media has decided on a narrative that matches right-wing talking points but not the facts. For instance, Bloomberg had this incredibly misleading headline yesterday, "Obama Team Backed $535 Million Solyndra Aid as Auditor Warned on Finances." If you replace "backed" with "touted," that would be accurate. But the headline makes it seem like the White House had decided to give $535 million to a company after an auditor had said it was financially troubled.

You have to read half the story to learn that the loan guarantee was made in 2009 and the audit was done in 2010 after market conditions had sharply worsened! And the Bloomberg story never explains that the company itself raised $250 million from private investors after the supposedly devastating audit

Source: Clean Technica (http://s.tt/13giD)

Fellow Bloggers. It is time to Starve the Beast! Just simply clcick on the "!" square on the right side of Fiesty's comments and you can "ignore" her from this point forward ... and she will go away. If you keep feeding the beast, it will continue to vomit out her dribble! She adds nothing to the discussion! Use the tools that MSNBC gives you to section off Fiesty and this blog will defintely improve! I have used it and , and my view of the blog has drammatically increased!

So here's the first sacrificial lamb to fall in the Solyndra mess. There will be more. I saw Mr. Obama tell a reporter on the news this weekend that Solyndra had been "fully vetted" before they got the half billion dollars. Then he moved the converstation to another topic.

He was lying and he knows he was lying and he had to know that the reporter knew he was lying too...there has already been too many 'connect the dots' staff e-mails that show the administration should have stopped the presses on the loan, due to multiple warnings that the company is doomed.

"Fully vetted" ??? The man is a stone cold liar.

When President Obama said "every economist says this Jobs Bill will insure us against another recession,"

Why didn't the journalist follow up with: "that's what you said last time before you spent $787 billion on shovel ready jobs, a stimulus that didn't work and only increased our debt. What makes this one different?

When President Obama said he's okay with the 5% surtax on millionaires, but he's still going to pursue raising taxes on those making $200-$250,000.

Why didn't the journalist follow up with: "But respectfully, Mr. President, you're the only one in the country who is stuck on that policy like glue. Senator Schumer says no to it, Representative Hoyer says no to it, the Democrats in the House say no to it. The Repubs certainly won't have it. Warren Buffet isn't even fond of it. You've not been able to get the right or the left on board with that job killing, economy stalling policy in over two years, what makes you think seriously you can still get it done?"

You know, journalist questions like that.

I did like the question from the press: "Mr. President, you're running around the country telling the people to call their reps, riling them up....and the phones aren't ringing. They are dead silent. Why do you think nobody is listening to you any more?"

I thought that was a good question.

(Paraphrasing, not directly quoting, of course)

I'm surprised he did not give him a hug when he said it. It was more a statement of empathy than a question.

I've been paying attention to politics since I was a little kid- I come from a pretty political family. I have NEVER seen a president treated this way by the press.

It's a disgrace to their profession.

Check out HOW they spent the money. It will blow your mind.

When you've composed yourself after reading about that- there's this- the White House tried to get them another half a billion- right before they went bankrupt. Politico had the story. ABC had the story. CBS, which is now loaded foe bear, after the White House tried to take away the press credentials of one of it's reporters because she asked uncomfortable questions- had the story.

NBC? The official cheerleading camp of the Obama administration? Hah.

Then they wonder why their own mothers don't watch. Or read.

Someone with business sense? Putting a business person in the government would be like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse. Just ask your economic forefather, Adam Smith, he was totally against businessmen determining regulations, not to mention he was also against business associations like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

I can forgive poor judgement, this was willful and maybe criminal.

Read the emails, it will make your stomach turn.

Jose, the legislation signed by Bush protected the taxpayers in the event of a failure- and set in place certain procedures to ensure the funds would only go to firms that could succeed- and pay back the money.

Obama abrogated the rules in order to get these Fu ds to Solyndra at the behest of George Kaiser- a major donor. Then, he restructured the loans- in abrogation of the law- so Kaiser could get HIS money, before we got ours.

That will probably get overturned- if the Justice department fights for it.

Think Holder will? I don't.

No joe,

President Obama abrogated the rules because he thinks he can. And no one calls him out on it. They did it on the General Motors bail out when the bond holders became subordinate to the unions. It will be interesting to see who gets priority on the next failed venture. Maybe not interesting. Probably more like predictable.

Changing the law at a whim for the benefit of political supporters. That must be the "change" we were looking for. So sad. So scary.

Hey, livingbarefoot, I wouldn't depend on undated e-mails from a committee, and e-mails dated before this administration was even in office, if I was you. It only makes you look like a naive patsy of the Republican/TP Inc. party. I read the e-mails, it only made me laugh at you for even referring to them.