What in the hell is wrong with people?

[kaz]

It's my country, my kind founded it

Another "the founding fathers were Marxists" claim. LOL, sure they were, Paint, sure they were...

Learn how to quote, and to you they would be Marxist.

That was a legitimate quote since I said it was "another" claim, I was saying that is an argument being propagated by a variety of leftists. It's clear if you read the statement that the quote part was referring to the leftists as a group who make that claim. I did not attribute the quote to you, and it's clear from my statement. I said you are making that claim, but the quote part is not attributable to you.

I think you need to go back to your Dick and Jane books and work your way back up.

 

[Spoonman]

Insane is believing that we have a voter fraud problem, when we don't. Insane is thinking that it's okay to demand photo ID from people who don't have it, and aren't required to, and then deny them their right to vote. Insane is ignoring the politics around voter ID laws and the courts decisions on such matters. Insane little friend, is you who are unable to be, so far, rational about this issue.

Start here: http://www.propublica.org/article/everything-youve-ever-wanted-to-know-about-voter-id-laws

And get rational about it.

Hey PantyHose, under which big rock will you scurry when America returns to its senses and you'll discover you have no place to belong?

It's my country, my kind founded it, and it continues on being a liberal nation. You're the one who needs to started packing, before the rabid married secular gays attack your house en mass, and redecorate...

your kind wears straight jackets and lives in padded cells.

 

[Boss]

You should give a damn, that's what the courts are trying to protect, the right of the people to vote.

And spare us your Big Patriot on the Internet drama queen act. We've heard it all before.

Hey crack pipe.... How the hell are they upholding the right for YOU to vote if I can vote twice? Three times? Four times? If I can vote for my dead grandmother?

What YOU are trying to protect (not a court) is YOUR right to throw elections and install your liberal totalitarians into power, like some 3rd-world shithole.

What REALLY takes the cake here is how you're all on the Court bandwagon for this.. oh yeah... COURTS are the deciders! The COURT has spoken! Yet when the COURT speaks in the case of Hobby Lobby or Citizens United..... aww Hell No! Can't have that! Gotta do something to overturn the COURT! This is how you people operate... total and complete disregard for anything other than marching in lockstep toward your liberal totalitarian agenda! Lawlessness, unconstitutional, cheating and disenfranchising, doesn't matter... ALL that matters is to keep moving toward totalitarianism.

YOU HAVE ALL GONE INSANE!

Insane is believing that we have a voter fraud problem, when we don't. Insane is thinking that it's okay to demand photo ID from people who don't have it, and aren't required to, and then deny them their right to vote. Insane is ignoring the politics around voter ID laws and the courts decisions on such matters. Insane little friend, is you who are unable to be, so far, rational about this issue.

Start here: Everything You?ve Ever Wanted to Know About Voter ID Laws - ProPublica

And get rational about it.

I'm very rational about it. Your little article points out it is DEMOCRATS who are opposed to photo ID requirements, led by Eric Holder's Justice Department, so we clearly SEE who is behind the efforts to thwart proper identification at the ballot box... I fucking wonder why?

Yeah, it's "politics" alright... dirty sleazy DEMOCRAT politics, and it's going to stop. Your article states there are 21 million who don't have photo ID, and the majority of them are not likely to vote, regardless of the state law. So this is not that big of a problem to fix... states can easily offer free photo IDs, and with digital technology available today, there is no reason this can't be done at the polling precinct... Bring your Social Security card and something to confirm your residence, and take your happy little ass over to that corner where the nice girl will take your picture and you'll have a photo ID. Then you can vote, problem solved!

I do not accept their premise there is very little voter fraud because they base this on the number of prosecuted cases. If we go by actual prosecutions, there is very little rape, drunk driving, child abuse and domestic violence. When I see stories of how some precincts in the last election had more votes cast than people who live in the precinct, my spider senses tell me something is not right. You can't have 104% turnout. I think the problem is RAMPANT, and we just have a lot of liberal fuckgoofs like YOU working the polls, so it slides under the table.

 

[DrDoomNGloom]

...
Insane is ...

Doing the same over and over and expecting a different result!!

The founders of this nation were NOT liberals, as we know liberals today. Continuing to post that lie does not make it magically become true.

You don't know Liberals today, you just parrot what you've been told, and Liberals today are 230 years smarter than those who founded the place so we've made some updates, as they would have expected us to do so. Liberals founded the nation and it's still a liberal nation.

Try asking next time, instead of telling.

Sorry Liberals, America Was (Also) Founded As A Religious Nation
Comment Now
Follow Comments

It’s the Fourth of July!

Happy Birthday, America!

Yay freedom!

Also, especially given the latest goings-on, it’s time to remind you, America, between your liberalism and your bad religion, that you were founded as a religious and a Christian nation.

There’s a lot of confusion about this, on both sides, so it’s important to get things right.

On the progressive side, the following things are true: (a) yes, many of the Founding Fathers were not Christian, or not strongly religious; many of them were Deists or Unitarians; there is even some controversy over whether George Washington had a religion; (b) yes, the Founding Fathers built an explicitly secular government and structure for the state, based also on Enlightenment values. It’s important for conservatives to remember that America was never intended to be a theocracy or even a sorta-theocracy.

With that being said…

The problem is that from these few facts progressives get a great very many things wrong.

You see, if there’s anything the Founding Fathers understood–and that too many progressives seem to have a harder time getting a grasp on–it’s the difference between the state and the society. And another difference they too rarely seem to grasp is the difference between a government explicitly affiliated with a religious tradition and a government animated by values drawn from this religious tradition.

The argument was never that America had or ought to have a religious government, it’s that it was founded as a religious nation. The nation includes the government (at its various levels), but also the society. And this is indisputably true.

Because there is one inescapable fact: at the time of the American founding, the reason why so many Englishmen had come to settle in the United States was for religious reasons. They were Puritans and other sorts of radical Christians whose religion had been oppressed in Britain and who came to the United States to practice their religion in peace.

It is this crucial fact that gave the wonderful balance that gave rise to America: because so many Americans were fervently Christian, the Nation would have a Christian culture and society; but because they had seen their religious freedom oppressed, and because they were so many denominations, the government would be neutral with regard to institutional forms of Christianity and with regard to specific denominations. It was seen as self-evident than in a country where most people were Christians, their democratic representatives would govern according to Christian values.

Hence the Establishment Clause, which says absolutely nothing about Christian values in government, but says everything about the English experience and the experience of some states in the United States: the belief by the new Americans that having an established religion is wrong, not so much to protect the government but rather to protect religion.

Even the non-Christians among the Founders knew this. The Founders were nothing if not steeped in the Enlightenment and its rationalism, but they also understood the importance of Christian values in animating society and government. A great example of this is the famous “Jefferson Bible“, which Jefferson built by literally cutting out the miraculous elements of the Bible, but keeping the ethical teaching. In other words, even as Jefferson rejected the core of Christianity as it had been understood for 17 centuries–the divinity of Jesus, and his atoning death and bodily resurrection–he recognized that the ethics of Christianity were still vital to a sound moral order and a sound life. (And yes, one can’t help but wonder if he had accepted everything about Christianity, how his behavior in re: slavery would have been different.)

And of course, it is no coincidence that the Founders proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence that the reason why people had human rights was because they were so endowed by their Creator. (Even as they said nothing about the precise identity of this Creator, to protect religious pluralism.)

In short, it is totally correct to say that America was founded, yes, with a “secular” government, but as a religious Nation.

This is something that the greatest analyst of America, Alexis de Tocqueville, plainly recognized. He thought religion was absolutely vital to the American experiment. Here’s how he saw it: if you have a society where there is great freedom and great equality of rights, people will never stop competing with each other and comparing each other to each other; the successful will want to lord it over the less-successful, and the less-successful will resent the more successful, and political battles will become extremely polarized (sound familiar?); only with a robust Christianity can America avoid such an outcome, because then people’s attentions will be drawn away from each other and towards God. It is a crucial part of the mix, as crucial as the Bill of Rights and pluralism.

You may loathe the idea of a “religious Nation” and that’s fine. To say that a country’s culture and society is religious is not to say it has to be sectarian or theocratic. But I would just say this: the system we were bequeathed was designed to work with this element as a crucial part of the mix. Is it any wonder that our system of government has become wonky in the past decades? It’s the elephant in the room.

Regardless of your views about what we should do today, it’s nonetheless the case that this is how America was originally designed and envisioned.

Happy Fourth of July!

…and God bless America.

Sorry Liberals, America Was (Also) Founded As A Religious Nation - Forbes

I don't ask shit, I tell people the fucking facts as verifiable by sanctioned internet content!!

Insane is believing that we have a voter fraud problem, when we don't. Insane is thinking that it's okay to demand photo ID from people who don't have it, and aren't required to, and then deny them their right to vote. Insane is ignoring the politics around voter ID laws and the courts decisions on such matters. Insane little friend, is you who are unable to be, so far, rational about this issue.

Start here: Everything You?ve Ever Wanted to Know About Voter ID Laws - ProPublica

And get rational about it.

Hey PantyHose, under which big rock will you scurry when America returns to its senses and you'll discover you have no place to belong?

It's my country, my kind founded it, and it continues on being a liberal nation. You're the one who needs to started packing, before the rabid married secular gays attack your house en mass, and redecorate...

It's my country, my kind founded it

Another "the founding fathers were Marxists" claim. LOL, sure they were, Paint, sure they were...

Learn how to quote, and to you they would be Marxist.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Hey crack pipe.... How the hell are they upholding the right for YOU to vote if I can vote twice? Three times? Four times? If I can vote for my dead grandmother?

What YOU are trying to protect (not a court) is YOUR right to throw elections and install your liberal totalitarians into power, like some 3rd-world shithole.

What REALLY takes the cake here is how you're all on the Court bandwagon for this.. oh yeah... COURTS are the deciders! The COURT has spoken! Yet when the COURT speaks in the case of Hobby Lobby or Citizens United..... aww Hell No! Can't have that! Gotta do something to overturn the COURT! This is how you people operate... total and complete disregard for anything other than marching in lockstep toward your liberal totalitarian agenda! Lawlessness, unconstitutional, cheating and disenfranchising, doesn't matter... ALL that matters is to keep moving toward totalitarianism.

YOU HAVE ALL GONE INSANE!

Insane is believing that we have a voter fraud problem, when we don't. Insane is thinking that it's okay to demand photo ID from people who don't have it, and aren't required to, and then deny them their right to vote. Insane is ignoring the politics around voter ID laws and the courts decisions on such matters. Insane little friend, is you who are unable to be, so far, rational about this issue.

Start here: Everything You?ve Ever Wanted to Know About Voter ID Laws - ProPublica

And get rational about it.

I'm very rational about it. Your little article points out it is DEMOCRATS who are opposed to photo ID requirements, led by Eric Holder's Justice Department, so we clearly SEE who is behind the efforts to thwart proper identification at the ballot box... I fucking wonder why?

Yeah, it's "politics" alright... dirty sleazy DEMOCRAT politics, and it's going to stop. Your article states there are 21 million who don't have photo ID, and the majority of them are not likely to vote, regardless of the state law. So this is not that big of a problem to fix... states can easily offer free photo IDs, and with digital technology available today, there is no reason this can't be done at the polling precinct... Bring your Social Security card and something to confirm your residence, and take your happy little ass over to that corner where the nice girl will take your picture and you'll have a photo ID. Then you can vote, problem solved!

I do not accept their premise there is very little voter fraud because they base this on the number of prosecuted cases. If we go by actual prosecutions, there is very little rape, drunk driving, child abuse and domestic violence. When I see stories of how some precincts in the last election had more votes cast than people who live in the precinct, my spider senses tell me something is not right. You can't have 104% turnout. I think the problem is RAMPANT, and we just have a lot of liberal fuckgoofs like YOU working the polls, so it slides under the table.

I can neither help nor debate the irrational. Moving on...

 

[Boss]

Insane is believing that we have a voter fraud problem, when we don't. Insane is thinking that it's okay to demand photo ID from people who don't have it, and aren't required to, and then deny them their right to vote. Insane is ignoring the politics around voter ID laws and the courts decisions on such matters. Insane little friend, is you who are unable to be, so far, rational about this issue.

Start here: Everything You?ve Ever Wanted to Know About Voter ID Laws - ProPublica

And get rational about it.

Hey PantyHose, under which big rock will you scurry when America returns to its senses and you'll discover you have no place to belong?

It's my country, my kind founded it, and it continues on being a liberal nation. You're the one who needs to started packing, before the rabid married secular gays attack your house en mass, and redecorate...

Actually, your "kind" didn't found it. You stole it from MY kind. The Choctaws and Cherokees had a country here LONG before you brought your European asses over. And nowhere is there ANY data to show we are a predominately LIBERAL nation. Every survey concludes we are about 60% center-right. Looks like YOU are the one who needs to start packing, buddy boy!

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Another "the founding fathers were Marxists" claim. LOL, sure they were, Paint, sure they were...

Learn how to quote, and to you they would be Marxist.

That was a legitimate quote since I said it was "another" claim, I was saying that is an argument being propagated by a variety of leftists. It's clear if you read the statement that the quote part was referring to the leftists as a group who make that claim. I did not attribute the quote to you, and it's clear from my statement. I said you are making that claim, but the quote part is not attributable to you.

I think you need to go back to your Dick and Jane books and work your way back up.

You did quote me, and it should have looked like this: "It's my country, my kind founded it...", or you could have done this without my name attached:

It's my country, my kind founded it, and then made your statement. Learn how to quote, along with American history and how to think.

 

[Pete7469]

You should give a damn, that's what the courts are trying to protect, the right of the people to vote.

And spare us your Big Patriot on the Internet drama queen act. We've heard it all before.

Hey crack pipe.... How the hell are they upholding the right for YOU to vote if I can vote twice? Three times? Four times? If I can vote for my dead grandmother?

What YOU are trying to protect (not a court) is YOUR right to throw elections and install your liberal totalitarians into power, like some 3rd-world shithole.

What REALLY takes the cake here is how you're all on the Court bandwagon for this.. oh yeah... COURTS are the deciders! The COURT has spoken! Yet when the COURT speaks in the case of Hobby Lobby or Citizens United..... aww Hell No! Can't have that! Gotta do something to overturn the COURT! This is how you people operate... total and complete disregard for anything other than marching in lockstep toward your liberal totalitarian agenda! Lawlessness, unconstitutional, cheating and disenfranchising, doesn't matter... ALL that matters is to keep moving toward totalitarianism.

YOU HAVE ALL GONE INSANE!

Their masters are insane. The bed wetters here on this board are just stupid.

Dangerously stupid.

The kind of stupid that texts while driving stupid.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Hey PantyHose, under which big rock will you scurry when America returns to its senses and you'll discover you have no place to belong?

It's my country, my kind founded it, and it continues on being a liberal nation. You're the one who needs to started packing, before the rabid married secular gays attack your house en mass, and redecorate...

Actually, your "kind" didn't found it. You stole it from MY kind. The Choctaws and Cherokees had a country here LONG before you brought your European asses over. And nowhere is there ANY data to show we are a predominately LIBERAL nation. Every survey concludes we are about 60% center-right. Looks like YOU are the one who needs to start packing, buddy boy!

We founded it over your dead bodies and while the people may be center-right, normal, the nation is center-left, which is because it was founded by Liberals using the principals and morals of Liberalism. I don't need to go anywhere, your kind just need to grow the fuck up and start dealing with reality.

 

[Pete7469]

It's my country, my kind founded it

Another "the founding fathers were Marxists" claim. LOL, sure they were, Paint, sure they were...

It's amazing how stupid some of these bed wetters are.

Their kind founded the USSR, Cuba, North Korea. Hell holes are created by progs.

 

[Pete7469]

Hey PantyHose, under which big rock will you scurry when America returns to its senses and you'll discover you have no place to belong?

It's my country, my kind founded it, and it continues on being a liberal nation. You're the one who needs to started packing, before the rabid married secular gays attack your house en mass, and redecorate...

Actually, your "kind" didn't found it. You stole it from MY kind. The Choctaws and Cherokees had a country here LONG before you brought your European asses over. And nowhere is there ANY data to show we are a predominately LIBERAL nation. Every survey concludes we are about 60% center-right. Looks like YOU are the one who needs to start packing, buddy boy!

Not only that, but they have all the leftist bullshit ever dreamt of in europe already. Why can't these parasites GO THERE? Instead they have to fuck up the last nation on earth which operated with minimal government interference and prospered like a mother fucker!!

Can't we have JUST ONE country on earth not enslaved by a nany state? Can't you pinko cocksuckers just fuck off for a while?

 

[JoeB131]

[

No, Solyndra is OBAMA's botched abortion baby, not Bush's! And NO, we did not spend billions of dollars with the expectation that half of it would be wasted on companies that would go tits up, and IF we did, everyone who voted for such a foolish endeavor needs to be kicked so far out of office they won't know where the hell they landed. That is about the boldest apologist rhetoric I've ever heard!

Well, I'm sorry for your basic illiteracy. Let me help you out.

Seven things you should know about Solyndra - Jun. 6, 2012

It was started by Bush: The DOE loan program that funded Solyndra was actually started by President Bush in 2005. It was intended to provide government support for "innovative technologies."

Congress thought there would be more failures: Two companies have declared bankruptcy under the loan program so far, out of the 33 projects funded. Congress was expecting more.

Lawmakers set aside $10 billion to cover any losses from $26 billion in loans. Solyndra could potentially cost the government $529 million. And Beacon, a power storage company that also went bankrupt, cost the government $12 million. So even if Solyndra ends up costing the full $529 million, there's still nearly $9.5 billion available should other loans go belly up.

I mean, do you actually research shit, or do you just accept whatever Young Republican garbage you hear on Faux News? (Rhetorical Question).

[
As for your traffic problems in Chicago, I really don't give a good fuck, it's not MY problem! Why do you think that you are entitled to MY tax dollars to fix your fucked up highways? In MY state, whenever we have a traffic problem, our state legislature votes to appropriate state funds to fix it, and if it's an Interstate, they apply through appropriate channels to the US DOT for partial federal funding. That's always been how those things are done, and there is no reason it can't be done in Chicago. Why didn't Senator Community Organizer fix your goddamn highways when he was there? Was he too busy fundraising and golfing then too???

Uh, guy, last time I checked, folks in IL pay taxes, too. And we end up sending more to Washington than we get back. Meanwhile, dumb as shit Red States end up getting more back than they send between military contracts, building roads across great stretches of nothing and guys like Ted Stevens who are able to manipulate the system because Alaska gets just as many Senators as Illinois.

[
Here's an illustration of just how fucked in the head you people have become... you think we have all this money piled up in Washington just waiting to fund whatever the hell your idiot heads can dream up to blow it on! We're fucking BROKE! We are $17.5 trillion in debt and rising! This year, we'll have to BORROW another $1.7 trillion just to keep the lights on! Now, it would be one thing if you were requesting we spend more money on treating disabled veterans who are literally dying in their wheelchairs waiting to see a doctor... but you're idiot ass is here lobbying for money to fix your goddamn highways because of rush hour traffic!

Liberal fucktards!

No, I don't think there's "all this money" piled up in Washington. I think we have a GDP of 17 Trillion and assets in the country worth 50 Trillion and the government has found it easier to borrow than tax.

And, no, we aren't borrowing anything near 1.7 Trillion this year.

 

[Dirk the Daring]

Infrastructure doesn't create economic prosperity?



Tell that to the entire system of shipping goods across the Country, i.e. the backbone of this economy in GENERAL.

What the fuck are you even yammering about, idiot? Things being shipped across the country are happening as a result of private free market capitalism, not the goddamn infrastructure!

We've already built an interstate highway system, it already exists! We don't need another one! We can't afford to pay for another redundant interstate system, moron! And even IF we could, it wouldn't mean one new dime of economic prosperity.

In the most recent "economic recovery stimulus" package, Obama was given $80 billion for "infrastructure projects" and he couldn't find any shovel ready jobs! Now a LOT of that money ended up going to Solyndra for "green jobs" but the cronies at Solyndra got rich and filed bankruptcy... so there was your infrastructure funding! Gone! *POOF* And here you are like the idiot moron liberal you are, pleading for MORE MONEY! Not only are you fuckers INSANE, you must think the rest of us are as well!

Um, so many fallacies in this argument.

First, the Solyndra loan was approved under the Bush Administration under a totally different program to develop alternative energy, and there was an expectation that about half the companies that got these funds were going fail. It was built into the program.

Second, while we do have a interstate system, a lot of it is crumbling, and some of it is inadequate. For instance, in Chicago, we have five expressways that go into the city- The Kennedy, the Ike, the Stevenson, the Dan Ryan and the Edens. And usually traffic become horribly snarled during Rush hour. Mostly because we have six times as many cars on it than we had in 1960 when they were built.

The Solyndra loan was NOT approved by the Bush administration; geez. Have you ever been right about anything in your entire life? Certainly not anything I've seen in this thread; you're a typical liberal - I believe that it happened this way therefore it did. But with information out there so readily available to you, including the ability to educate yourself on a multitude of topics, you choose to stay willfully ignorant. This is precisely why people associate liberalism with a religion (rightfully I might add)!

Did the program that funded the Solyndra loan start under George W. Bush? David Plouffe says so | PolitiFact

I once had this article by Politifact thrown at me as DEFINITIVE PROOF that BOOOSH was responsible for the Solyndra loan. Except, if you read all the way to the bottom, you come across this little nugget;

Ultimately, the Bush administration program didn't finalize a single loan guarantee.

See, and here's the part you really have to pay attention to b/c I know that 'nuance' is difficult for liberals to comprehend - the program that enabled Obama to throw money at Solyndra was initiated by Bush, but not the actual loan to Solyndra. See the difference?

The bigger issue regarding the Solyndra loan btw was how it was restructured to favor the investors over the tax payers.

Treasury officials: Never saw a loan like Solyndra - BusinessWeek

The half-billion dollar loan to Solyndra Inc. was restructured earlier this year so that private investors moved ahead of taxpayers for repayment on part of the loan in case of a default.

This was a case of Obama literally throwing taxpayer money into the hands of his political cronies. Think of how many roads could have been built with $500 million...

 

[Dirk the Daring]

What the fuck are you even yammering about, idiot? Things being shipped across the country are happening as a result of private free market capitalism, not the goddamn infrastructure!

We've already built an interstate highway system, it already exists! We don't need another one! We can't afford to pay for another redundant interstate system, moron! And even IF we could, it wouldn't mean one new dime of economic prosperity.

In the most recent "economic recovery stimulus" package, Obama was given $80 billion for "infrastructure projects" and he couldn't find any shovel ready jobs! Now a LOT of that money ended up going to Solyndra for "green jobs" but the cronies at Solyndra got rich and filed bankruptcy... so there was your infrastructure funding! Gone! *POOF* And here you are like the idiot moron liberal you are, pleading for MORE MONEY! Not only are you fuckers INSANE, you must think the rest of us are as well!

Um, so many fallacies in this argument.

First, the Solyndra loan was approved under the Bush Administration under a totally different program to develop alternative energy, and there was an expectation that about half the companies that got these funds were going fail. It was built into the program.

Second, while we do have a interstate system, a lot of it is crumbling, and some of it is inadequate. For instance, in Chicago, we have five expressways that go into the city- The Kennedy, the Ike, the Stevenson, the Dan Ryan and the Edens. And usually traffic become horribly snarled during Rush hour. Mostly because we have six times as many cars on it than we had in 1960 when they were built.

Yea, I took his meltdown as a concession.

The interstate is a great example he brought up - it brought about economic prosperity in that it allowed businesses to do more and in shorter order.

G'job proving himself wrong here and melting down while doing so.

So if every business in America shut down tomorrow, by official decree of the God-King Obama, how would the interstate system bring about economic prosperity?

 

[JoeB131]

Dirk, Sweetie, just because Bush left it in the "Inbox" along with "Fixing the economy" and "Killing Bin Laden", doesn't mean he thought that Solyndra was a terrible idea.

Quite the contrary, they said, "This is what you need to do to get approved", which they did.

And here's another kicker.

Taxpayers aren't the only losers: Private investors lost almost twice what the government did -- nearly $1 billion.

While much has been made that the largest private investor was an Obama supporter, the second largest was a fund controlled by the Walton family -- of Wal-Mart (WMT, Fortune 500) fame. Walton family members are noted Republican donors.

Get that. People who had some pretty good business sense ALSO thought Solyndra was a good bet.

And this was the thing. What did the company in was not that the concept wasn't good. It was. What did it in was that flat panels became a lot cheaper when the Chinese started making them.

 

[Dirk the Daring]

Dirk, Sweetie, just because Bush left it in the "Inbox" along with "Fixing the economy" and "Killing Bin Laden", doesn't mean he thought that Solyndra was a terrible idea.

Quite the contrary, they said, "This is what you need to do to get approved", which they did.

And here's another kicker.

Taxpayers aren't the only losers: Private investors lost almost twice what the government did -- nearly $1 billion.

While much has been made that the largest private investor was an Obama supporter, the second largest was a fund controlled by the Walton family -- of Wal-Mart (WMT, Fortune 500) fame. Walton family members are noted Republican donors.

Get that. People who had some pretty good business sense ALSO thought Solyndra was a good bet.

And this was the thing. What did the company in was not that the concept wasn't good. It was. What did it in was that flat panels became a lot cheaper when the Chinese started making them.

Yep, still blaming Bush for the God-King's mishaps;

Obama?s Solyndra Problem

Obama referred to Solyndra’s loan at an Oct. 6 press conference as “a loan guarantee program that predates me.” That’s not accurate. It’s true that the Energy Policy Act of 2005 created a loan guarantee program for clean-energy companies developing “innovative technologies.” But Solyndra’s loan guarantee came under another program created by the president’s 2009 stimulus for companies developing “commercially available technologies.”

The president also overstated past Republican support for the program, saying “all of them in the past have been supportive of this loan guarantee program.” Republicans overwhelmingly opposed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, and some of them even voted against the Energy Policy Act of 2005 at a time when Republicans controlled both houses of Congress.

The loan guarantee program that provided financing for Solyndra, however, does not predate Obama.

There are two loan guarantee programs for renewable energy companies. The first was created under section 1703 of Title XVII of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. It was designed to help support U.S. companies developing “a new or significantly improved technology that is NOT a commercial technology,” according to the Energy Department’s description of the program. It was a self-pay credit subsidy program, meaning the companies receiving the loan would have to pay the government a fee “equal to the present value of estimated payments the government would make in the event of a default.”

The second program was created with the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, more commonly known as the stimulus law. The recovery act amended the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to create section 1705 for “commercially available technologies,” as the Energy Department explains on page 12 of a 2009 report on stimulus funding. The stimulus provided more funding for the loan guarantee programs. The loans under the new program also came with no credit subsidy fees, making them more attractive and less expensive than those under the program signed into law by President Bush. It was under this program that Solyndra was able to get financing, although the company initially applied under the section 1703 program.

The Obama administration even TOUTED the fact that this loan was made possible by the ACA;

In a March 2009 press release announcing a $535 million loan guarantee for Solyndra, the Energy Department said: “This loan guarantee will be supported through the President’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which provides tens of billions of dollars in loan guarantee authority to build a new green energy economy.” Damien LaVera, an Energy Department spokesman, confirmed that Solyndra’s funding came solely from section 1705.

 

[kaz]

It's my country, my kind founded it

Another "the founding fathers were Marxists" claim. LOL, sure they were, Paint, sure they were...

It's amazing how stupid some of these bed wetters are.

Their kind founded the USSR, Cuba, North Korea. Hell holes are created by progs.

Yes, that is their heritage. The founding fathers were very much today's libertarians.

 

[Boss]

Wow, I can hardly read the posts what with all the blood from Joe's ass all over the place.

Good job Dirk, now we just need to appropriate some Chicago tax dollars to clean up this mess!

 

[Boss]

Uh, guy, last time I checked, folks in IL pay taxes, too. And we end up sending more to Washington than we get back. Meanwhile, dumb as shit Red States end up getting more back than they send between military contracts, building roads across great stretches of nothing and guys like Ted Stevens who are able to manipulate the system because Alaska gets just as many Senators as Illinois.

This is not about who gets what or who has more Senators. Federal tax money shouldn't be used to take care of Illinois problems. That's the STATE'S responsibility. This is where you uneducated hicks fail in understanding Federalism. It's probably not your fault, you were probably taught by illiterate Dept. of Education public school teachers who never read the Constitution. Instead of teaching you about how our system of government works, they spent all their time teaching you to hate Southern people. Now you're a fucking bigot.

No, I don't think there's "all this money" piled up in Washington. I think we have a GDP of 17 Trillion and assets in the country worth 50 Trillion and the government has found it easier to borrow than tax.

And, no, we aren't borrowing anything near 1.7 Trillion this year.

You don't even know what the hell you're talking about. I bet you can't even explain what the GDP is. This nation currently holds over $100 trillion in UNFUNDED liabilities. Our deficit has been growing at an average of $1.7 trillion each year this buffoon has been in office. And YES, that money has to be borrowed, that's what DEFICIT means, dumbass! The debt was less than $10 trillion when Bush left office, it's now over $17 trillion and nothing approaching a balanced budget in sight. YOUR president has increased the national debt more than all previous presidents COMBINED! That includes Wilson and FDR who had to fund TWO World Wars.

 

[JoeB131]

Wow, I can hardly read the posts what with all the blood from Joe's ass all over the place.

Good job Dirk, now we just need to appropriate some Chicago tax dollars to clean up this mess!

Actually, dirk just showed his illiteracy.