Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

Another campaign cornerstone for Obama, more workers on diability than got new jobs. LOL

[url=http://news.investors.com/article/617233/201207061636/disability-climbs-faster-than-jobs-under-obama.htm?p=full]3.1 Million Workers Join Disability Ranks Vs. 2.6 Million That Got Jobs In Obama Recovery - Investors.com[/url]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=saden1;924974][yt]IkikKelEuQM[/yt][/quote]


What is the point of that clip that someone cut up and left out the rest of what he said?

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

SlinginSammy33,

[B]A quote from your WaPo article: [/B]

“Even the documents cherry-picked by House Republicans today affirm what we have said all along: This loan was a decision made on the merits at the Department of Energy,” Schultz said in a statement. “Nothing in the 85,000 pages of documents produced thus far by the Administration or in these four indicate any favoritism to political supporters.”

[B]Washington Post Dec. 28, 2011[/B]

"records do not establish that the Energy Department pressured anyone to approve the Solyndra loan to benefit political contributors."

[B]Per Politico. Hardly left leaning. 3/27/2012[/B]

More than a year into a probe that's extended to the Energy Department loan guarantee portfolio, Republican investigators even acknowledge they've fallen short of substantiating their allegations that the administration helped political allies like Tulsa oilman George Kaiser secure hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidies through a loan guarantee to Solyndra.

"Is there a criminal activity? Perhaps not," Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa told POLITICO after last Tuesday’s showdown with Energy Secretary Steven Chu. "Is there a political influence and connections? Perhaps not. Did they bend the rules for an agenda, an agenda not covered within the statute? Absolutely."

[B]More from Politico: 6/5/12[/B]

Among other findings...Spinner, an Obama fundraiser, monitored the Solyndra loan guarantee while working as an Energy Department adviser — [B]Still, House investigators have been unable to show that the administration approved the Solyndra guarantee to please the president’s campaign donors.[/B]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;924954]Romney was busy saving the 2002 Olympics for the USA. This article from the NY Times, certainly no friend of conservatives:

[URL]http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/19/us/politics/19romney.html?pagewanted=all[/URL]

Again, all the Bain crap was vetted thoroughly by the Ds in MA when Romney ran for Gov. It had no teeth then and has no teeth now.[/quote]


So you are saying he committed a felony by lying to the SEC right? It has to be one or the other.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=12thMan;924983]SlinginSammy33,

[B]A quote from your WaPo article: [/B]

“Even the documents cherry-picked by House Republicans today affirm what we have said all along: This loan was a decision made on the merits at the Department of Energy,” Schultz said in a statement. “Nothing in the 85,000 pages of documents produced thus far by the Administration or in these four indicate any favoritism to political supporters.”

[B]Washington Post Dec. 28, 2011[/B]

"records do not establish that the Energy Department pressured anyone to approve the Solyndra loan to benefit political contributors."

[B]Per Politico. Hardly left leaning. 3/27/2012[/B]

More than a year into a probe that's extended to the Energy Department loan guarantee portfolio, Republican investigators even acknowledge they've fallen short of substantiating their allegations that the administration helped political allies like Tulsa oilman George Kaiser secure hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidies through a loan guarantee to Solyndra.

"Is there a criminal activity? Perhaps not," Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa told POLITICO after last Tuesday’s showdown with Energy Secretary Steven Chu. "Is there a political influence and connections? Perhaps not. Did they bend the rules for an agenda, an agenda not covered within the statute? Absolutely."

[B]More from Politico: 6/5/12[/B]

Among other findings...Spinner, an Obama fundraiser, monitored the Solyndra loan guarantee while working as an Energy Department adviser — [B]Still, House investigators have been unable to show that the administration approved the Solyndra guarantee to please the president’s campaign donors.[/B][/quote]

Solyndra I have always thought Obama did so he had some green company he could point to that the stimulas helped. He ignored all the warnings just so he could stand in front of the American people and tout them as his success. Hell he just said the other day that no one is successful without the federal goverment LMAO. So to try and prove his point he ignored all warnings and wasted $550,000,000. Wonder how many people are sitting at home retired from that failed company set up for the rest of their life?

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=NC_Skins;924995]So you are saying he committed a felony by lying to the SEC right? It has to be one or the other.[/quote]

No the left is trying to say he lied to the SEC.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=firstdown;925002]No the left is trying to say he lied to the SEC.[/quote]

I'm confused. Which is it with you guys? Was he responsible or not? According to you guys, he's not responsible for the actions of the company from '99-'02. Fine, if that's the stance you want to take, then you are agreeing that he lied to the SEC during those 3 years by signing documents and having him listed as the President/CEO.


Sammy is saying that Romney wasn't in charge of Bain from '99-'02 and even posted links. If what Sammy is said is true, then he lied to the SEC.


Again, it has to be one or the other.


Sammy is saying he wasn't in charge because he was at the Olympics, and ultimately lied to the SEC.


You (FD) are saying he was in charge and didn't lie to the SEC. Right?

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=NC_Skins;925006]I'm confused. Which is it with you guys? Was he responsible or not? According to you guys, he's not responsible for the actions of the company from '99-'02. Fine, if that's the stance you want to take, then you are agreeing that he lied to the SEC during those 3 years by signing documents and having him listed as the President/CEO.


Sammy is saying that Romney wasn't in charge of Bain from '99-'02 and even posted links. If what Sammy is said is true, then he lied to the SEC.


Again, it has to be one or the other.[/quote]

Which laws did he break if your saying he broke a law?

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=firstdown;924999]Solyndra I have always thought Obama did so he had some green company he could point to that the stimulas helped. He ignored all the warnings just so he could stand in front of the American people and tout them as his success. Hell he just said the other day that no one is successful without the federal goverment LMAO. So to try and prove his point he ignored all warnings and wasted $550,000,000. Wonder how many people are sitting at home retired from that failed company set up for the rest of their life?[/quote]

Actually that's not what he said and I'm almost 100% sure you didn't watch the speech.

What you or SlinginSammy33 won't realize or admit, not sure which. The DOE_ Loan Program was started by George Bush. [I]The Energy Department's loan guarantee program was created as part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, passed by a Republican-controlled Congress and signed by Bush.[/I]

Did you read that, 2005! And it's not stimulus money for Christ's sake. Good lord! There's some debate whether Bush wanted to close the loan out after before he left office, but their fingerprints are on this too.

Solyndra didn't work out. As I've said before, they bet on the wrong horse. I don't fault the president for wanting an enterprise, that he's politically invested in, to succeed. There's nothing wrong with that as long as everything is done on the level.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=firstdown;925008]Which laws did he break if your saying he broke a law?[/quote]

If he left the company in 1999, then his name shouldn't have been on the company's SEC filings as listed at the CEO. We call this falsifying documents or lying.


He's claiming he left the company in 1999. (to escape the bad deeds from Bain)


SEC documents show he didn't leave the company.



So, I ask again. Which is it?

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=12thMan;925010]Actually that's not what he said and I'm almost 100% sure you didn't watch the speech.

What you or SlinginSammy33 won't realize or admit, not sure which. The DOE_ Loan Program was started by George Bush. [I]The Energy Department's loan guarantee program was created as part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, passed by a Republican-controlled Congress and signed by Bush.[/I]

Did you read that, 2005! And it's not stimulus money for Christ's sake. Good lord! There's some debate whether Bush wanted to close the loan out after before he left office, but their fingerprints are on this too.

[B]Solyndra didn't work out. As I've said before, they bet on the wrong horse. I don't fault the president for wanting an enterprise, that he's politically invested in, to succeed. There's nothing wrong with that as long as everything is done on the level[/B].[/quote]

I knew you figure out how to put this on Bush. Your right and it was not part of the stimulas but it was done arround the same time period. The facts are his own people threw up red flags and he still proceed so he could tout this green company and the jobs he created. It really does not matter if it was the stimulas or another program he still wasted 560 million dollars. It was his signature giving the ok not Bush and maybe Bush knew better then giving them the money.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=NC_Skins;925011]If he left the company in 1999, then his name shouldn't have been on the company's SEC filings as listed at the CEO. We call this falsifying documents or lying.


He's claiming he left the company in 1999. (to escape the bad deeds from Bain)


SEC documents show he didn't leave the company.



So, I ask again. Which is it?[/quote]

You need to start reading your own links. He relinquished control of the company. I really do not know how all that works but if there was any wrong doing it would have come out by now when he ran for govoner.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=firstdown;925017]You need to start reading your own links. He relinquished control of the company. I really do not know how all that works but if there was any wrong doing it would have come out by now when he ran for govoner.[/quote]

If he "relinquished control" in 1999, then the documents on the SEC filings were inaccurate and were indeed a felony.


You guys are flip flopping worse than Romney.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=firstdown;924981]What is the point of that clip that someone cut up and left out the rest of what he said?[/quote]

The context is that he was attacking his opponent, Ted Kennedy, for making the same excuse he is now about his blind trusts and its activities. Hilariousness of Romney and his current predicament can be seen here:

[yt]BnTo7ySH_d4[/yt]

Pow pow pow!

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=firstdown;925017]You need to start reading your own links. He relinquished control of the company. I really do not know how all that works but if there was any wrong doing it would have come out by now when he ran for govoner.[/quote]

Can you tell me what constitutions relinquishment of control and when did he relinquish control?