Did the Algae Car Go the Way of Solyndra?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe that research is still ongoing, and not a product yet, but Obama has been successful with other alternative fueled cars, like the Tesla Model S. It's weird how I never hear about Obama's success with Tesla, but constantly hear about Solyndra.

Oh success. What has been the Executive Genius's ROI overall?

If he was a venture capitalist, his energy investments would be fantastic.

Could you put some numbers to that? I need a good laugh.

He and his party have over the last few decades have made Detroit a real paradise.

Tesla poster here. Bush, among others, almost destroyed the economy. Democrats don't have a monopoly on poor economic decisions.

You were supposed to clear up my confusion. How about the Executive Genius ROI, (look it up)?

He is a failure and so are you.

As far as I know, the government is not a hedge fund or a venture capitalists, but counting the bailouts and Fannie/Freddie, it's around 10%.

Agree, but Obama fancies himself as a venture capitalist and many other things that he is not, transparent, Christian man, yadda yadda.
Disagree on 10%.

PP here.
1. How does Obama fancy himself as a venture capitalist?
2. Obama's been moderate on transparency. (Keep in mind that I am not saying that he is the most transparent president)
3. Seriously? If you say you're Christian, you're Christian.
4. TARP and Fannie both turned profits, and both around 10%, given that Fannie has made an additional 10 billion since it repaid it's debt, and paid $5 billion extra when it repaid the debt.

1. it was never his place to do Solyndra risks.
2. he is very dark as opposed to transparent with dark, dark lies like the "Benghazi video" keep your doc, insurance pland and I will save $2500 per family knowing full well he is lying.
3. "you will know them by their fruits".....his are evil and bitter
4. he has wasted lots of money then laughed about it.....shovel ready jobs.....ha ha from him

Got it?

PP here.
1. He wasn't taking risks, his administration was trying to help green technology advance by giving grants.
2. The "Benghazi video" has evidence backing it, but if false is no worse than "WMDs in Iraq." The "keep your own plan" and "$2500 per family" quotes turned out to be false, but the ACA has still helped many. He has also made the inner workings of the White House more transparent, as shown by my link, although he did not keep all his promises in that regard.
3. Just because you don't like someone doesn't mean that they're evil. Also, he has said that he's Christian and has attended church.
4. How has he "wasted lots of money"? The deficit is controlled by Congress, if that's what you're talking about. [/quote

1. he and his idiots risked and lost Solyndra and so on. Some might say he was helping his pals.
2. Nothing supports the Benghazi video, and his ACA lies were known by him to be lies when his evil lips let them fly. "Turned out" funny, you fool.
3. His fruits are evil .....probably over your head.
4. Begining from his PR cinematography of Air Force 1 for his personal puffy chest he has wasted money at every turn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

1. it was never his place to do Solyndra risks.

Yes, actually it is. The government does a ton of investment in industry. The reason that we are ahead of the world in fracking is federal investment that dates back to the 70's. Since then the Federal government has invested in industries from high tech to oil and gas through every President, Republican or Democrat.

You can argue that renewable energy is not a sector worth investing in. You can argue that Solyndra was not a good company to invest in. But if you want to say that Presidents should not do this, well your party's own backers would pitch a fit.

BTW in case you didn't realize, the reason Solyndra failed is that China subsidized their solar panel development more than we did. They aim to win this market because they know the long term opportunity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

1. it was never his place to do Solyndra risks.

Yes, actually it is. The government does a ton of investment in industry. The reason that we are ahead of the world in fracking is federal investment that dates back to the 70's. Since then the Federal government has invested in industries from high tech to oil and gas through every President, Republican or Democrat.

You can argue that renewable energy is not a sector worth investing in. You can argue that Solyndra was not a good company to invest in. But if you want to say that Presidents should not do this, well your party's own backers would pitch a fit.

BTW in case you didn't realize, the reason Solyndra failed is that China subsidized their solar panel development more than we did. They aim to win this market because they know the long term opportunity.

One second. Was the Solyndra program and information surrounding it TRANSPARENT? I think not. I seem to recall a rush to throw money at it AFTER the facts suggested it as a foolish move.

Maybe, just maybe it was yet another King Cluster will have his own way inspite of the facts. -- Get him some therapy. Being abandoned by both parents at an early age it traumatic. He has lots of hate in him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

1. it was never his place to do Solyndra risks.

Yes, actually it is. The government does a ton of investment in industry. The reason that we are ahead of the world in fracking is federal investment that dates back to the 70's. Since then the Federal government has invested in industries from high tech to oil and gas through every President, Republican or Democrat.

You can argue that renewable energy is not a sector worth investing in. You can argue that Solyndra was not a good company to invest in. But if you want to say that Presidents should not do this, well your party's own backers would pitch a fit.

BTW in case you didn't realize, the reason Solyndra failed is that China subsidized their solar panel development more than we did. They aim to win this market because they know the long term opportunity.

One second. Was the Solyndra program and information surrounding it TRANSPARENT? I think not. I seem to recall a rush to throw money at it AFTER the facts suggested it as a foolish move.

Maybe, just maybe it was yet another King Cluster will have his own way inspite of the facts. -- Get him some therapy. Being abandoned by both parents at an early age it traumatic. He has lots of hate in him.

Well given that the Bush Administration was in the process of approving it before Obama came into office, I'd say everyone had fair warning. They brought it in front of the DOE credit review committee in January of 2009 before Obama was inaugurated. The committee remanded it back as not ready. Later Obama brought it back to the same committee, who are not political appointees, and they approved it.

And the process for providing energy loan guarantees is a law that Bush signed in 2005, the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Funding came from the stimulus, but the process was written into law when the Republicans were in power. The loan guarantee is a "1703" if you want to understand this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

1. it was never his place to do Solyndra risks.

Yes, actually it is. The government does a ton of investment in industry. The reason that we are ahead of the world in fracking is federal investment that dates back to the 70's. Since then the Federal government has invested in industries from high tech to oil and gas through every President, Republican or Democrat.

You can argue that renewable energy is not a sector worth investing in. You can argue that Solyndra was not a good company to invest in. But if you want to say that Presidents should not do this, well your party's own backers would pitch a fit.

BTW in case you didn't realize, the reason Solyndra failed is that China subsidized their solar panel development more than we did. They aim to win this market because they know the long term opportunity.

One second. Was the Solyndra program and information surrounding it TRANSPARENT? I think not. I seem to recall a rush to throw money at it AFTER the facts suggested it as a foolish move.

Maybe, just maybe it was yet another King Cluster will have his own way inspite of the facts. -- Get him some therapy. Being abandoned by both parents at an early age it traumatic. He has lots of hate in him.

Well given that the Bush Administration was in the process of approving it before Obama came into office, I'd say everyone had fair warning. They brought it in front of the DOE credit review committee in January of 2009 before Obama was inaugurated. The committee remanded it back as not ready. Later Obama brought it back to the same committee, who are not political appointees, and they approved it.

And the process for providing energy loan guarantees is a law that Bush signed in 2005, the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Funding came from the stimulus, but the process was written into law when the Republicans were in power. The loan guarantee is a "1703" if you want to understand this.

iI understand:

1. information was hidden
2. information was changed
3. someones hard drive crashed
4. pressure from donors to the King Cluster campaign exerted pressure
5. all the above

Take your pick.