THE DEBATE.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The fact is the Obama admin spent 90 bil on a bunch of corrupt green energy ####### that accomplished nothing.

Well, he did piss away $89 billion of taxpayer borrowed money, in exchange for a few million in campaign contributions. This may be one argument for the public financing of presidential elections. $90 billion would have bought a ton of airtime, for tens of campaign cycles.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

I sat through a minute or so of the debate, during which Obama pointed out how Mittens' tax policy would work and Mittens' responded with "That's not my tax policy".

*change channel*

To MSNBC but got no comfort there either.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

There was nothing corrupt about it. Solyndra couldn't compete with a market flooded by chinese manufactured solar panels. The failure was part of a bigger problem with our global economy, where its nearly impossible to compete against third world labor.

Meanwhile, advocates of renewable energy wanted to see it quickly become competitive with conventional energy, knowing the amount of resistance by politicians who are deep in the pockets of the fossil fuel industry. Big oil isn't about to give up its market dominance without a fight.

Renewable energy is here to stay. The question is how long will it take for the U.S. to catch up with the rest of the industrialized world by increasing its production of domestic, renewable energy and thereby increase its energy independence? And who is foreward thinking enough tosupport it? The mantra, 'drill baby, drill,' is both asinine and ignorant.

More proof, that when it comes to commerce and the economy, Obama and his staff, are total nOObs.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Well, he did piss away $89 billion of taxpayer borrowed money, in exchange for a few million in campaign contributions. This may be one argument for the public financing of presidential elections. $90 billion would have bought a ton of airtime, for tens of campaign cycles.

Rommney had a great line for this "it would pay for a million math teachers"

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The fact is that Romney lied about this issue in the debate.

Yep.

Romney used to be a proponent of government funding of clean energy technologies. His 2008 energy policy platform called for a "dramatic increase" in "federal spending on research, development, and demonstration projects that hold promise for diversifying our energy supply." Among those projects were "bringing clean energy technology to market through commercialization of large-scale renewables."

......

As governor of Massachusetts, Romney handed out loans to firms in emerging technology fields,some of which ended up (like Solyndra) going bankrupt. The governor's office noted that those expenditures were part of a stimulus bill he initially opposed but reluctantly supported.

....

...it wasn't simply an Obama administration-backed project. Though the current White House accelerated the loan guarantee -- even as evidence emerged that it could go bad -- the roots of the loan actually emerged during the Bush administration. And the process was facilitated, in part, by a cadre of industry lobbyists of different ideological stripes.

One of those lobbyists is a semi-prominent supporter of Mitt Romney. As Solyndra was going through bankruptcy, it moved to hire fellow former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld to help lobby on its behalf. For $825 an hour, Weld and his firm helped the company deal with government investigations and other regulatory matters.

The Romney campaign did not immediately return a request for comment for this story.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/31/mitt-romney-solyndra-obama_n_1560505.html

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Romney wrong on Solyndra facts

FORTUNE -- Part of Mitt Romney's pushback against President Obama's Bain Capital attacks has been to highlight Solyndra, the California-based solar panel maker that went bust after blowing through a $535 million Department of Energy loan (plus far more in private equity funding). Basically something along the lines of: "I'm not the only one with some bad investments on his resume, and it's better to squander private equity than public equity."

So last Thursday Romney held a surprise press conference at Solyndra's shuttered headquarters. During his prepared statement, Romney said:

"An independent inspector general looked at this investment and concluded that the Administration had steered money to friends and family and campaign contributors."

Romney then repeated the claim later in the press conference.

Small problem: No inspector general ever "concluded" such a thing, at least not based on any written reports or public statements.

Romney seemed to be referring to Congressional testimony offered up by Gregory Friedman, inspector general of the U.S. Department of Energy, from March 2011. In it, he said: "We currently have 64 open investigations associated with the Recovery Act… Schemes under investigation include the submission of false information in applications for funding, fraudulent claims for rebates, claims for unallowable or unauthorized expenses, the directing of contracts and grants to friends and family, weatherization fraud to 7 include mischarging, and other attempts to fraudulently obtain Recovery Act funds."

Not only did Friedman never specifically cite Solyndra, but his office never brought charges related to any "directing of contracts and grants to friends and family." A spokeswoman for the DoE Inspector General's office declined to say whether any such investigation remained open, except to say that it never made the type of conclusion asserted by Romney.

In response to my inquiry, a Romney spokeswoman forwarded me a link to a Newsweek piece that mischaracterized Friedman's "friends and family" line (albeit without linking it specifically to Solyndra). She also noted that Obama supporter George Kaiser was the "single largest investor" in Solyndra, even though it actually was the private equity arm of a nonprofit, anti-poverty foundation founded by Kaiser.

When I wrote back for further clarification – or perhaps a retraction – the Romney spokeswoman went radio silent.

It's one thing to spin something to one's advantage. It's another to simply make things up to make the other guy look bad. Romney's Solyndra speech was an example of the latter. Disgraceful.

http://finance.fortu...solyndra-facts/

Edited October 4, 2012 by Commie Appeaser

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

I love watching liberals trying to comfort each another.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

I love watching liberals trying to comfort each another.

I have no idea where you're getting this. Every single person here has said Romney won the debate.

How does fact checking what the candidates said equal comforting each other?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

AARP calls Obama a liar:

http://blog.aarp.org/2012/10/04/aarps-statement-on-the-denver-presidential-debate/

[aaydrian 479]

Listen, all the first (of three) debate did was re-energize lack lustre Republicans. It won't get a single extra voter on their side. Plus debates are won on facts, not how you present your stories. And idiotic Republicans are jizzing in each others faces because one of 1500 Mitt Romneys showed up that night sayiing a few things he wasn't saying before. Still Obama needs to get it together or this fight he has going may get tooooo close for comfort.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Listen, all the first (of three) debate did was re-energize lack lustre Republicans. It won't get a single extra voter on their side. Plus debates are won on facts, not how you present your stories. And idiotic Republicans are jizzing in each others faces because one of 1500 Mitt Romneys showed up that night sayiing a few things he wasn't saying before. Still Obama needs to get it together or this fight he has going may get tooooo close for comfort.

I don't think that's true. If Romney performs as well in the next two as he did last night, I think it will sway a few undecided voters his way for sure.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

I have no idea where you're getting this. Every single person here has said Romney won the debate.

How does fact checking what the candidates said equal comforting each other?

Whos facts? The ones you believe?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

http://finance.fortu...solyndra-facts/

Whether an inspector general mentioned about Solyndra or not, it's still a fact that that company was payback from Obama to a big campaign donors and continued donations.

You can try and spin your way out for the President all day long, but it is what it is..

[aaydrian 479]

I don't think that's true. If Romney performs as well in the next two as he did last night, I think it will sway a few undecided voters his way for sure.

No I said based only on the first debate nobody will swing. You can't choose a winner when the game is not even half way through and even then you have to wait for the ding ding ding.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

I don't think that's true. If Romney performs as well in the next two as he did last night, I think it will sway a few undecided voters his way for sure.

Undecided voters in focus group swing sharply toward Romney; Frank Luntz: ‘I’ve never seen anything like this’; CBS post-debate poll shows big win for Romney