Home » Posts tagged with » house (Page 19)

The Solyndra scandal is certainly an “embarrassment” for the White House, as some network news reports have called it. But somehow those same reports have still failed to criticize Obama's green jobs programs for fiscal waste, even the government loan program that gave Solyndra millions. To their credit, all three broadcast networks aired stories in September about the California solar company that declared bankruptcy in August after getting a $535 million loan guarantee from the federal government in September 2009. But out of 11 network stories on Solyndra this year (most in September), not a single one used the company's failure to criticize the loan program it used to get more than half a billion taxpayer dollars. Although some of those stories mentioned that Solyndra was touted as a stimulus success story, none explicitly used its failure to argue that such green ” investment ” programs were flawed. Unlike the networks, print outlets have been exposing not only Solyndra, but problems with the programs that allowed this scandal to occur. According to job creation figures reported by The Washington Post, the $36.8 billion loan program has created only 5 percent of the 65,000 jobs promised and each job cost more than $5 million. Meanwhile, at least one administration spokesman absurdly claimed the program has been successful in spite of Solyndra's failure. The Washington Examiner quoted Damien LaVera, an Energy Department spokesman, who said of Solyndra: ” The project that we supported succeeded. The facility was producing the product it said it would produce, and consumers were buying the product .” What is stunning about that quote was that LaVera said it after the company folded, but it still didn't invite skepticism from network reporters. Lachlan Markay , an investigative reporter for The Heritage Foundation, pointed out the economic problem with defining success in that way, rather than the way private businesses without government assistance would define it. Markay wrote about LaVera's and other statements from administration officials: “The comments underscore the point I was getting at in speaking with ABC: from an economic perspective, the Solyndra loan was a failure. But if the purpose of the loan guarantee program was to get more people to invest in green technology, then Solyndra's failure has no bearing on the program's success. The merit of the program does not depend on companies succeeding or failing.” “The loan guarantee program exists in order to insulate would-be investors from the normal workings of the market, and hence to encourage more investment,” Markay concluded. And that is precisely the problem, one that the networks continue to ignore. Print news outlets including the Post have reported that the loan program is failing to meet expectations, particularly in the area of job creation. But the networks are still refusing to critically examine the overall green technology policies of the Obama administration. Before Solyndra went under, but after a number of stimulus-financed green technology companies had gone out of business, the Business & Media Institute looked at network coverage of “green jobs” and found criticism of those policies was left out of 92 percent of the 52 stories between Jan. 17, 2009, and Aug. 17, 2011. Solyndra's Growing Scandal The networks have admitted that Solyndra's failure reflects poorly on the Obama administration, which approved the loan and touted the company as a model green jobs success. But only one of 11 stories actually mentioned the word “scandal.” A few of the stories downplayed the seriousness by calling it an “embarrassment” or “headache” for the Obama administration. But it is looking more serious than a “headache,” based on recent print news coverage of the investigation of Solyndra. The Hill reported on Sept. 20 that top Solyndra executives will plead the Fifth during a Capitol Hill hearing on Sept. 23 because the Justice Department is in the middle of investigating the bankrupt solar company. Recent print reports have also exposed financial problems at the company going all the way back to 2007. The Associated Press reported Sept. 16 that Solyndra was “hemorrhaging hundreds of millions of dollars for years before the Obama administration signed off on the original $535 million loan guarantee …” AP even said that the company's SEC filings showed losses of $114.1 million in 2007, $232.1 million in 2008 and $119.8 million in just nine months of 2009 – suggesting that the company was not a good risk from the beginning. Yet the government approved the loan and Obama and Vice President Biden both praised the company as a success. Earlier this year, according to AP, the Obama administration “restructured” Solyndra's loan to ensure that private investors would be paid ahead of taxpayers if the company defaulted. One of those private investors was Argonaut Ventures LLC, “an investment vehicle of the George Kaiser Family Foundation.” George Kaiser is the head of that foundation and is himself a major Obama donor. ABC and its investigative correspondent Brian Ross have done a much better job than other network reporters by breaking the story of a plant closure and layoffs at Solyndra back in March 2011 and exposing the company's close ties to President Obama. ABC has continued to expose the Solyndra scandal and recently reported emails suggesting the company was not a sound investment and the government knew that. On Sept. 14, Ross told ABC “World News with Diane Sawyer” viewers that “New emails show the California company got its $535 million loan despite deep misgivings inside the government.” One of those emails warned: “… the model runs out of cash in Sept. 2011.” But overall, the print news media are doing a much better job than the networks of exposing flaws not only at Solyndra, but with other companies and the Obama administration's policies on green energy. The Washington Post reported on Sept. 14 that Obama's “green-tech” loan program was struggling to fulfill its job-creation goals. The newspaper said the $38.6 billion loan guarantee program used to finance Solyndra and other companies has fallen seriously short of its 65,000 job creation promise: 61,455 jobs short in fact . The program has only “directly created 3,545 new, permanent jobs after given out almost half the allocated amount,” The Post wrote. That's more than $5 million per job . Solyndra has been under investigation by the House Energy and Commerce Committee for some time, according to Politico. On Sept. 20, Rep. Darell Issa, R-Calif., announced that the Oversight and Government Reform Committee would begin an investigation of government loan programs to private companies in light of allegations surrounded Solyndra and a wireless company called Lightsquared, The Hill reported. None of this is stopping the Obama administration's efforts to give away billions more in loans to renewable energy companies before the end of the month. Bloomberg reported that $9.2 billion in loan guarantees could be given away by the Sept. 30 deadline. In that report, Bloomberg quoted Department of Energy spokesman Damien LaVera (the same DOE spokesman who said bankrupt Solyndra was a success) who said: “We want to get as many of these done in a way that responsible protects the taxpayers' interest … If they meet conditions set out in the agreement, then they'll close.”

Continue reading …
Three Weeks After Solyndra Scandal Began MSNBC Prime Time Programs Still Haven’t Reported It

Today is the three week anniversary of the beginning of the Solyndra scandal, and the prime time programs of the so-called “news network” named MSNBC have yet to report one single word about it. This is despite daily revelations about the growing controversy for the Obama administration including the following from the San Jose Mercury Tuesday: The top executives at Fremont's bankrupt solar manufacturer Solyndra plan to invoke their Fifth Amendment rights and refuse to answer questions when they appear at a congressional hearing Friday. Brian Harrison, Solyndra's CEO, and W.G. “Bill” Stover, the company's chief financial officer, have voluntarily agreed to appear before the House Energy and Commerce Committee on Friday and had previously assured congressional staffers they would testify. Attorneys for both Harrison and Stover sent letters Tuesday to Reps. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., and Diana DeGette, D-Colo., informing them of their clients' plans to remain silent due to the highly publicized FBI raid of Solyndra's offices and the ongoing criminal investigation by the Department of Justice. Copies of the two letters were obtained by this newspaper. As the Mercury noted, this is serious business: The Solyndra saga has riveted Washington, and the committee's Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations is looking into the Fremont company's $535 million loan guarantee from the Department of Energy and subsequent bankruptcy and raid by the FBI. Solyndra, its investors and individual executives have retained top-shelf lawyers as the company, once the Obama administration's poster child for the promise of green jobs, juggles a thorny bankruptcy proceeding, a widening congressional investigation and a criminal probe into potential fraud. It was also reported Tuesday that the $535 million Solyndra received in stimulus funds was more than 35 states were given from that spending bill for the construction and/or repair of highways, roads, and bridges. This is extremely controversial given the President's new stimulus proposal requesting additional federal expenditures for similar supposedly job-producing infrastructure activities. Yet MSNBC's prime time commentators Chris Matthews, Al Sharpton, Lawrence O'Donnell, Rachel Maddow, and Ed Schultz haven't done one single report on this scandal since it began three weeks ago. Exactly how can the executives at MSNBC and parent network NBC condone such an overt demonstration of media bias?

Continue reading …
Independent and Moderate Voters: What’s a ‘David Brooks?’

enlarge Let’s get this out of the way: David Brooks and his colleague Tom Friedman are two of the biggest frauds in the world of punditry. Anyone who claims to speak on behalf of “moderate” and “independent” voters has no idea what they’re talking about and are only using the mantle of “moderation” to advance their own personal views. You see this every three weeks or so when Friedman claims that America is just on the cusp of forming a new radical centrist party that just-so-happens to believe everything that Tom Friedman believes. The reality, of course, is that actual independent voters don’t give a damn about what David Brooks thinks and only care about whether they have jobs and whether they feel economically secure. You can read John Judis breaks this down pretty well in his piece debunking the myth of independent voters from late last year: The two other groups, the Disaffected Republicans and the Doubting Democrats, who make up 36 percent of Pew’s sample, are swing voters who are not dependable partisans. They are overwhelmingly white. They are not likely to have graduated from college and many of them have not attended college at all. Most of them make less than $75,000. It’s fair to characterize them as white working-class voters. Why are they independents and not Republicans and Democrats? According to the Pew poll, both groups believe that “parties care more about special interests than average Americans.” And this is generally true! Actual swing voters generally support parties based on whatever special interest they happen to be angrier at any given time. As I’ve said in the past , a lot of blue-collar swing voters will support Republicans when they want lower taxes and tough-on-crime/family values sorts of policies while they’ll support Democrats when they want to protect middle-class entitlement programs and to kick Wall Street’s ass. Most importantly, they vote based on how well the economy happens to be doing . They do not, repeat, not, pick up their copies of the New York Times every day and say to themselves, “Wow, David Brooks and Tom Friedman are reading my mind! We need a third party that coincidentally conforms to every one of their ideas!” Anyway, back to Brooks. Today he’s upse t because it seems, it least for the time being, that Obama has realized that taking David Brooks’ advice is not actually the key to win over independent voters. Yes, I’m a sap. I believed Obama when he said he wanted to move beyond the stale ideological debates that have paralyzed this country. I always believe that Obama is on the verge of breaking out of the conventional categories and embracing one of the many bipartisan reform packages that are floating around. But remember, I’m a sap. The White House has clearly decided that in a town of intransigent Republicans and mean ideologues, it has to be mean and intransigent too. The president was stung by the liberal charge that he was outmaneuvered during the debt-ceiling fight. So the White House has moved away from the Reasonable Man approach or the centrist Clinton approach. But here’s the thing: Obama really tried doing all that crap. He did! I remember slapping myself in the forehead all summer (and being too depressed to even attempt blogging) reading about it! Don’t you remember that column you wrote this past July hilariously titled “The Grand Bargain Lives” where you said that Obama and Boehner were “close to a deal” that would cut Medicare and Social Security in exchange for some tax increases? Let’s use the wayback machine to find it : At the last minute, two bipartisan approaches heave into view. In the Senate, the “Gang of Six” produces one Grand Bargain. Meanwhile, President Obama and John Boehner, the House speaker, have been quietly working on another. They suddenly seem close to a deal. There’s a lot you don’t know about these two Grand Bargains. But they probably have the elements that have been part of just about every recent bipartisan debt proposal: some sort of tax reform that lowers overall rates while raising revenue by closing loopholes; cuts in the level of entitlement spending without much fundamental reform; a freeze on domestic discretionary spending. Mostly, there will be vagueness. The specifics of what exactly will be cut and who will be taxed will not be filled in. You are being asked to support a foggy approach, not a specific plan. You are being asked to do this even though you have no faith in the other party and limited faith in the leadership of your own. You are being asked to risk your political life for an approach that bears little resemblance to what you would ideally prefer. Do you do this? I think you do. So let’s recap: This past summer you urged members of Congress to support a vague package that none of them had time to read that would have promised both tax increases and entitlement cuts. I may not be a political scientist or anything but none of those three things — tax increases, entitlement cuts or vague bills that no one has read — are popular with the independent voters you claim to speak for. The politics of such a deal were so transparently stupid that even Mickey Kaus can see it. Thankfully for us all, the Republicans decided to K.O. this Grand Bargain and then proceeded to get a very-crappy-but-not-catastrophic deal with $2.4 trillion in future budget cuts with no additional revenues. Question: Did independent voters see that Obama had done his earnest best to compromise with Republicans and give him a pat on the head? Hell no — they concluded that he was an ineffectual weakling who had no idea what the hell he was doing. What’s more, it led to the further demoralization of a Democratic base that had been getting its butt handed to it pretty much since the day Bush left office. The approach that Brooks advocates was, in fact, a giant loser. Triangulation, centrism and most-reasonable-guy-in-the-room-ism can work when things are going well. When Clinton was up for reelection in ’96 the economy was recovering, people were feeling better about the direction of the country and Newt Gingrich had just committed a string of political blunders that lessened his ability to be an effective leader. But when there’s high unemployment, a continuing mortgage crisis and the prospect of a double-dip recession, people don’t want the most reasonable guy in the room. They want help . If Obama has finally realized that David Brooks has no idea what he’s talking about, well, that’s a small step in the right direction. It may not win him reelection but it will at least guarantee that he receives more than one vote (i.e., David Brooks’ vote and no votes from anyone else) come November 2012.

Continue reading …

When Solyndra bosses arrive for a House hearing this week, they won’t be saying much. CEO Brian Harrison and CFO Bill Stover plan to take the Fifth during congressional questioning Friday, their lawyers told House investigators in letters. “I have advised Mr. Harrison that he should decline to answer questions…

Continue reading …

A woman in Florida has pulled off what her obstetrician figures to be a 1-in-5-million longshot by giving birth to twins, reports the St. Petersburg Times . Why the long odds? Andreea Barbosa has a rare condition called uterus didelphys, meaning she has not one uterus but two. That in itself…

Continue reading …
CEO’s Blockbuster Congressional Testimony: I Was Fined for Hiring too Many People

Last week, Peter Schiff, CEO of of Euro Pacific Precious Metals, provided stunning testimony to the House Oversight Committee and explained how President Obama’s ideas of government stimulus are not the solution to the unemployment problems, they are the problems. The full testimony is 22 minutes long, but its worth every minute. Of course, Obama’s stimulus Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : Big Government Discovery Date : 15/09/2011 16:59 Number of articles : 6

Continue reading …
CEO’s Blockbuster Congressional Testimony: I Was Fined for Hiring too Many People

Last week, Peter Schiff, CEO of of Euro Pacific Precious Metals, provided stunning testimony to the House Oversight Committee and explained how President Obama’s ideas of government stimulus are not the solution to the unemployment problems, they are the problems. The full testimony is 22 minutes long, but its worth every minute. Of course, Obama’s stimulus Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : Big Government Discovery Date : 15/09/2011 16:59 Number of articles : 6

Continue reading …

Darrell Issa has long promised to use his House oversight panel to investigate the Obama administration, and the White House has served up two hanging fastballs for him: Solyndra and LightSquared. The chair of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee told C-SPAN today that he intends to investigate the administration’s…

Continue reading …
Rick Perry accuses Barack Obama of betraying Israel over Palestinian bid

Texas governor turns Palestinian statehood bid into election issue, accusing Obama of siding with ‘orchestrators of terrorism’ The confrontation over the Palestinian bid to win recognition as a state at the United Nations shifted to the US presidential race when Rick Perry, the leading Republican contender, accused Barack Obama of appeasing terrorists and betraying Israel. Perry, at a campaign rally in New York, launched a stinging attack on Obama’s handing of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, accusing him of abandoning America’s ally in favour of the “Arab street” in the Egyptian revolution, as diplomatic wrangling continued to try to head off a showdown in the UN security council over the Palestinian request for statehood. The Palestinian leader, Mahmoud Abbas, was to meet the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, and the British foreign secretary, William Hague, on Tuesday as Europe spearheaded efforts to dissuade him from pursuing the UN move with promises to revive peace negotiations. Obama has said the US will veto the Palestinian request – expected to be made on Friday – for the security council to recognise a state based on the land occupied since the 1967 war, with East Jerusalem as its capital. The US president is also expected to speak out strongly against the move in his speech to the UN general assembly on Wednesday. But Perry said that was not good enough, and blamed the president for bringing on the crisis by siding with the Palestinians over the expansion of Jewish settlements in the occupied territories, and by saying the US would act as a neutral broker in talks. Perry said: “The Obama policy of moral equivalence, which gives equal standing to the grievances of Israelis and the Palestinians, including the orchestrators of terrorism, is a very dangerous insult. There is no middle ground between our allies and those who seek their destruction. “We see the American administration having a willingness to isolate a close ally, and to do so in a manner that is both insulting and naive.” Perry attacked Obama for his recent statement, which angered Israel, that any final peace agreement should be based on the borders that existed before the 1967 war, even though it is widely accepted that will be the basis of a deal. “It was wrong for this administration to suggest the 1967 borders should be the starting point for Israel-Palestinian negotiations,” Perry said. “The Obama administration put Israel in a position of weakness, taking away their flexibility to offer concessions as part of the negotiations process. “Indeed, bolstered by the Obama administration’s policies and the apologists at the UN, the Palestinians are exploiting instability in the Middle East, hoping to achieve their objective without concessions and direct negotiations with Israel.” Perry also criticised Obama’s handling of the revolutions in the Middle East, particularly in abandoning support for the former Egyptian leader, Hosni Mubarak, who was a close ally of Israel. The Texas governor spoke of the “risk posed by the new regime in Egypt”, which is not as sympathetic to Israel. “The Obama administration has appeased the Arab street at the expense of our national security,” he said. Perry’s attack is part of a growing Republican assault on Obama’s Israel policy as evidence he is weak, despite the administration’s success in finding Osama bin Laden. Israel can be a sensitive political issue in the US, in part because of considerable support for the Jewish state among Christian evangelical voters. Jewish voters tend to overwhelmingly support Democratic presidential candidates, but unhappiness over US policy on Israel can have an impact in swing states, most notably Florida, and on congressional elections. Last week, Democrats suffered an upset, losing a New York congressional election to the Republicans in a heavily Jewish constituency. Although several factors were at play, particularly high unemployment and economic stagnation, polls showed that among some Jewish voters there was significant disquiet about Obama’s Israel policies. More importantly, the issue is used by Obama’s opponents to accuse him of being soft on America’s enemies and incompetent. Republicans in Congress are blaming the president for the Palestinian request to the security council because of a speech Obama made to the UN a year ago, in which he said he hoped to welcome a sovereign state of Palestine as a UN member by October 2010. The Palestinians are portraying that statement as “Obama’s promise”. Republicans say it is further evidence that Obama is hostile to Israel. Another leading presidential contender, Mitt Romney, last week said the Palestinian approach to the UN “is another testament of the president’s failure of leadership”. Perry said that if the UN grants additional recognition to the Palestinians, the US should close the Palestinian Liberation Organisation office in Washington. Other Republicans want to go further, and cut of the more than $500m in aid the Palestinian Authority receives from the US each year. The House of Representatives foreign affairs committee last week held a hearing on the issue in which the chairperson, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, called for aid to be cut. Israel’s deputy foreign minister, Danny Ayalon, said at the UN on Tuesday that the Palestinians should be punished for taking the statehood bid to the security council. “There should be consequences for irresponsible behaviour. There should be consequences for the Palestinians shutting the door on negotiations,” he said. In the West Bank, which the Palestinians want the UN to declare part of their state, a call to Jewish settlers to rally against the move flopped when only a few dozen attended a series of marches against the Palestinians’ bid for statehood. Soldiers in riot gear watched as the protesters burned the Palestinian flag near Beit El, a settlement close to the Palestinian city of Ramallah. “If the Palestinians want a state, they can go to Europe or the US – it’s very nice there,” said Michael Ben Ari, a member of the Israeli parliament. “This is the land of Israel and we are here forever.” Hardline settlers have stepped up attacks on Palestinians and their property in the runup to the UN meeting, according to the Palestinian media, amid fears on both sides that they are trying to provoke confrontations. The Israeli security forces have stockpiled tear gas, rubber bullets and foul-smelling water cannon in preparation for possible violent demonstrations. Rick Perry Israel Palestinian territories Barack Obama US elections 2012 US politics United States United Nations Republicans Chris McGreal Harriet Sherwood guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Paul Ryan, Herman Cain Push For Tax Increases On Middle Class

WASHINGTON — Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said on Sunday that House Republicans would oppose President Barack Obama’s payroll tax cuts for both employers and employees, arguing that the policy had already failed to provide a sufficient boost to the economy. “It hasn’t worked,” Ryan said, suggesting the current temporary tax cut should be allowed to expire, which will amount to a 50 percent tax hike on workers making less than $106,000 per year. He also said he opposes the president’s proposal to require millionaires to pay the same tax rate as the middle class, known as the Buffett plan. “Class warfare might make for good politics, but it makes for rotten economics,” Ryan said. As chairman of the House Budget Committee and the author of a long-term plan that radically alters Medicare and slashes tax rates for the wealthy as well as social spending, Ryan serves as something of an economic spokesman for House Republicans. GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain, who followed Ryan on “Fox News Sunday,” seconded his opposition to the tax on millionaires as well as the payroll tax cut extensions. “It’s too little, too late,” said Cain. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), appearing later on NBC’s “Meet The Press,” said he too would oppose taxing millionaires at a higher rate, citing Obama’s own comments from 2010, when the president argued that taxes shouldn’t be raised during rough economic times. “I think what he said then still applies,” McConnell said, insisting that small businesses would be hurt by such a tax plan. As for the namesake of the Buffett plan, McConnell said that if billionaire investor Warren Buffett feels like he’s not paying his fair share, “he should send us a check.” “If Warren Buffett would like to give up some of his benefits, we’d be happy to talk about that,” McConnell said, suggesting his benefits be means-tested. Ryan, while backing a payroll tax hike, nevertheless said that tax hikes cannot be part of the deficit-cutting proposal that the super committee comes up with. As part of his explanation, Ryan made it clear that he sees no difference between raising taxes proactively and allowing tax breaks to expire. “You already have a $1.5 trillion tax increase coming in 2013,” he said, referring to the expiration of the Bush tax cuts that were extended by President Obama for two years. Ryan’s reference to the expiration as an “increase” gives greater weight to his willingness to let tax cuts for the middle class expire. Because of the looming Bush tax cut expiration, said Ryan, the super committee should eschew tax hikes. “Why on earth would we go with that, especially when the problem is spending?” he said. “You’re basically saying there’s going to be no bargain, no compromise,” host Chris Wallace pointed out. “Clearly, Democrats could work with us” and get $1.5 trillion in spending cuts with no additional revenue, Ryan said. “That shouldn’t be that tough.” As for the budgetary woes outside Washington, Ryan said, “We just don’t think we should be bailing out state governments.” He added, “That’s the constitutional responsibility of state governments, not federal governments.” Former President Bill Clinton, appearing on CBS’s “Face The Nation,” backed Obama’s tax hike on millionaires, but suggested that the singular focus should be on job creation, with tax increases on the wealthy coming once the economy improves. “I don’t have any objection to talking about it now,” said Clinton. “Whether it’s good politics or not, it’s an honorable thing to do.” Clinton urged passage of the payroll tax cut extension and the creation of an infrastructure bank to fund investments. He also hit at the major drag on the economy. “I don’t believe America can return to the full employment days of the ’90s until we can clear this bank debt from the mortgage crisis,” he said. WATCH highlights from this week’s Sunday shows:

Continue reading …