ABC News.com: Solyndra Loan: Now Treasury Is Launching Investigation

[Teller]

The Treasury Department's inspector general has opened a new front in the investigation of the government loan to Solyndra' date=' the now bankrupt company that had been touted as a model of President Obama's ambitious green energy program, ABC News and the Center for Public Integrity/iWatch News have learned.

The new probe involves the $535 million loan, arranged by the Energy Department, but actually processed by the Federal Financing Bank, a government lending institution that falls under Treasury's control. Already, the FBI and the Energy Department's inspector general have executed search warrants at Solyndra's headquarters and questioned company executives[/quote']

Most major scandals happen during a president's second term. But I guess when you know you're not getting one, you go ahead and get it out of the way.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/solyndra-loan-now-treasury-launching-investigation/story?id=14521917

---------- Post added September-14th-2011 at 09:33 PM ----------

This president seems incapable of handling anything. I understand he wants to push his green initiatives, and I'm fine with that. Get us off foreign oil ASAP, so that members of my kids' generation won't have to die for oil. But DO NOT use $535 million of taxpayer money, and pay back private investors while just letting our dollars go up in flames. Really Obama? Really? You're soooo pissed off at the wealthy elite that you ENSURE they get every dime back while we LOSE every dime? And that's before we even get into the 1.025% rate they received on OUR money, before deciding not to pay it back at all.

The stimulus didn't work. The jobs bill has NO estimate of how many jobs they expect to create with our half a TRILLION dollars. And we're supposed to just fork it over, no questions asked? Seriously, Mr. President? ****ing seriously?

And don't for a second think of giving me that "I'm sure the president didn't know." Execs from Solyndra were there AT LEAST 20 times between September 2010 and April 2011. He knew, first hand. And pissed our money away anyway. (Again, dems, while ensuring the fat-cat private investors didn't lose a dime!!! Hooray for Obama taking care of the little guy!!!)

To say I'm irate doesn't even begin to cover it. Now that I've gotten it out of my system, I'll let the investigations and hearings play out. But perception is reality, and my perception is that this president is in WAY over his head.

[LadySkinsFan]

I think Obama has good intentions. Some people don't have good intentions and people embezzle money all the time. That amount of money, in the hands of those with no morals or scruples, it too tempting not to take for themselves. If you want to talk about taking federal money, why not talk about all those Bush/Cheney cronies who made money off of the 2 illegal wars that Bush/Cheney started based on lies.

This means that money that could have gone to a more morally conscious company did not go there. I don't fault Obama, I fault the people who allegedly took the money. I hope a full scale investigation ensues, that if there is illegal activity that the perpetrators are prosecuted, no matter what political party or politicians with whom they are affiliated.

[Duckus]

Sounds like a cluster ****. Glad they are investigating it.

[Teller]

I think Obama has good intentions. Some people don't have good intentions and people embezzle money all the time.

Interesting. Other people do it, so no problemo, O. Go for it!

That amount of money' date=' in the hands of those with no morals or scruples, it too tempting not to take for themselves.[/quote']

But, we're supposed to cough up $500 BILLION for the jobs bill, with no estimates on how many jobs it will create, right? Or does your theory only apply when it's convenient?

If you want to talk about taking federal money' date=' why not talk about all those Bush/Cheney cronies who made money off of the 2 illegal wars that Bush/Cheney started based on lies.[/quote']

Really? Afghanistan was illegal and based on lies? Who did we kill there again? And what did he do that made us go after him? And further...this thread is NOT about Bush. Bush STOPPED the loan for Solyndra before leaving office. Obama fast-tracked it and rammed it through, KNOWING they didn't have the credit rating for it. Try, just for once, to get through an Obama thread without "waaahhh!!! Bush!!!! waaaahh!!!!!"

This means that money that could have gone to a more morally conscious company did not go there. I don't fault Obama' date=' I fault the people who allegedly took the money. I hope a full scale investigation ensues, that if there is illegal activity that the perpetrators are prosecuted, no matter what political party or politicians with whom they are affiliated.[/quote']

20 White House visits by Solyndra staff to the White House between September '10 and April '11. You damned good and well that if this was Bush and Enron, you'd be ALL over it. A little consistency, please.

[mossomo]

2 illegal wars that Bush/Cheney started

You! Really. I'm pretty ****ing sure both the Afghan and Iraqi War were voted and passed Congress. How's is that illegal?

Libya - not so. Link some of your counter-protests to this Libyan affair. I could be wrong but I think I'll double down and call a spade a spade and say I think you're a god damn hyprocrite. So next time, shhhhh you.

Sounds like a cluster ****. Glad they are investigating it.

They knew the company was insolvent and pushed it anyway. The whole investment was based on hope and dreams and we the tax payer are screwed. And they gave this week 9/14/2011 after the Solyndra banckruptcy - another $500M to another crony capitalist $$$ project/embezzlement and ANOTHER loan in some other green tech start-up - thats another two loans to admin friends this week after this $500M failure for more investment in bs start-ups that can't sell their product to ourselves or trading partners.

Someone bump this when the two crony capitalist beneficiaries go bancrupt. Hope I'm wrong and they succeed. I'll update and give a couple links.

Edits: Evergreen Solar Inc. and Spectrawatt Inc. both filed for Chapter 11 protection in august too.

Another winner of stimulus who ultimately lost is Mountain Plaza Inc. Despite declaring bankruptcy in 2003, the company received $424,000 from the Tennessee Department of Transportation as part of a grant aimed at installing "truck stop electrification" systems that allow idling truckers to plug-in during extended stops and turn off their exhaust-belching, environment polluting diesel engines.

Mountain Plaza had filed for bankruptcy protection again in June 2010. TDOT, which received a $2 million stimulus grant from the Environmental Protection Agency for the project, said it didn't learn about the bankruptcy until October, but it is closely monitoring the project.

Another winner: Olsen's Crop Service and Olsen's Mills Acquisition Co. also failed despite Olsen's Mills receiving $10 million to increase employment, add equipment and machinery, refinance existing debts and work capital for operations and acquire land. The payout -- part of a $64 million package to nine rural businesses in Wisconsin for economic development loan assistance -- was delivered in January 2010, after Olsen's Mills filed for bankruptcy protection for defaulting on a $60 million bank loan.

[martytheman]

You! Really. I'm pretty ****ing sure both the Afghan and Iraqi War were voted and passed Congress. How's is that illegal?

Libya - not so. Link some of your counter-protests to this Libyan affair. I could be wrong but I think I'll double down and call a spade a spade and say I think you're a god damn hyprocrite. So next time, shhhhh you.

He means illegal in the dim's twisted view of what's "morally right".

Damn what everything or everyone else shows to the contrary.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

Yes, this President is in over his head and can't do anything...

except for saving the American car industry...

except for passing the biggest piece of healthcare legislation since Medicare (just because YOU don't like it doesn't it mean it wasn't an accomplishment)...

except for killing Osama bin Laden....

except for helping to take out Qaddafi while keeping us out of the middle of it...

except for seeing the draw down in Iraq...

except for quadrupling drone attacks on al Qaeda in Pakistan and crippling them and putting them on their last legs...

except for ending Don't Ask, Don't Tell....

except for getting two more women onto the Supreme Court, including the Court's first Hispanic...

except for overhauling the credit card consumer protections...

except for keeping us out of a Second Great Depression and stalling BUSH's recession...

Etc.

Yup. He hasn't done ****.

That argument is just stupid to me. It shows a person either isn't paying attention, had unrealistic expectations going in (ESPECIALLY from the Left), or just simply doesn't like the President/doesn't agree with him/wouldn't appreciate or respect anything he did period.

---------- Post added September-14th-2011 at 11:45 PM ----------

P.S. Please nominate Rick Perry. Obama's a lock to lose anyway. Might as well get the most conservative candidate in there.

[LadySkinsFan]

I am totally anti-war and have been since the 60s when in high school. Wars are a waste of resources both human and monetarily. And I notice you didn't refute that the Iraq war at the very least was based on Bush/Cheney lies. But it's all good. We now have killed and maimed young men and women and much richer military industrial complex, so it's all good.

---------- Post added September-14th-2011 at 11:55 PM ----------

And Rick Perry is going to lead us to Dominionism and make the US of A theocracy.

[SkinsHokieFan]

I am totally anti-war and have been since the 60s when in high school. Wars are a waste of resources both human and monetarily. And I notice you didn't refute that the Iraq war at the very least was based on Bush/Cheney lies. But it's all good. We now have killed and maimed young men and women and much richer military industrial complex, so it's all good.

---------- Post added September-14th-2011 at 11:55 PM ----------

And Rick Perry is going to lead us to Dominionism and make the US of A theocracy.

Why does a critique of this adminstration bring up a "where were you when BUSH/CHENEY/DEBIL" was doing it?

The Bush administration has been gone for 3 years. HH was a 2 time Bush voter who VOTED OBAMA

Lets talk about the topic at hand, the administration at best completely botched this and demonstrated further incompetence, at worst there is some serious corruption here.

Between this, fast and furious, and the economy just doing diddly poo for 90 percent of America, this has been a terrible summer for the administration. The killing of Bin Laden seems like years ago

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

I'm curious SHF: who's your choice in the GOP primary?

(You know I always respect your opinion.)

[LadySkinsFan]

And you all really think that the Republicans, whose policies for years has gotten us into this mess (rolling back financial regulations that WERE working and not to mention Clinton, President Republican Lite), are going to do any better? Really? You expect over 30 years of legislation that allowed outsourcing of American jobs, that rolled back all financial protections and the bailouts that bailed out Wall Street but has left the rest of us in very reduced circumstances and prospects for the future and that legislation was driven by BOTH parties to fix everything in 3 years? Yeah, that's totally realistic. <sarcasm off>

[mossomo]

and stalling BUSH's recession...

I wont start with how limp the whole blame Bush thing is anymore - you had both houses and the pres.

I will say that the greatest tax receipts that we as a nation have had ever received was in 2007 - under Bush tax cuts I'll like to jab, and before Obama's assault on producers and wealth/job creators.

---------- Post added September-14th-2011 at 09:54 PM ----------

You expect over 30 years of legislation that allowed outsourcing of American jobs,

This right here is the danger my friends.. ..that allowed... . You see how their mind is: control. Allowed. We allow you. 30 years of gov't that allowed outsourcing. You see, we need more gov't to prevent this absurdity of market reality. And that's the lesson.

[NoVaO]

This president seems incapable of handling anything. I understand he wants to push his green initiatives, and I'm fine with that. Get us off foreign oil ASAP, so that members of my kids' generation won't have to die for oil. But DO NOT use $535 million of taxpayer money, and pay back private investors while just letting our dollars go up in flames. Really Obama? Really? You're soooo pissed off at the wealthy elite that you ENSURE they get every dime back while we LOSE every dime? And that's before we even get into the 1.025% rate they received on OUR money, before deciding not to pay it back at all.

There were $38.5 billion of loans given out by the DoE. Congress and the administration had expectations that 5% - 10% of these loans would fail. Solyndra represents 3% of those loans. Obviously the loan was a failure, and an embarrassment for the administration, especially since they openly touted this company. It sounds like some blinders were put on regarding the financial risk of the company, or at least the DoE thought it was worth it to take the risk. If there was some shady business that happened, we'll find out in the investigation. It doesn't sound like to me there was, other than wanting the loan approval to coincide with Obama's appearance at the company.

The stimulus didn't work.

Sure it did. Not every program in the stimulus worked -- some worked more than others -- but it did what it was supposed to do given its overall size. Jobs in green energy has always been a long term thing and it probably should have been kept out of the original bill. But that was only one part of the Recovery Act.

You can argue that the stimulus bill was not worth its overall cost, but its hard to deny that it did not help matters...

- The President’s Council of Economic Advisers estimated that between 2.5 and 3.6 million jobs were created or saved by the stimulus through the fourth quarter of 2010.

- CBO: Between 1.3 million and 3.6 million jobs saved or created.

- IHS/Global Insight: 2.45 million jobs saved or created.

- Macroeconomic Advisers: 2.3 million jobs saved or created.

- Moody’s Economy.com: 2.5 million jobs saved or created.

http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2011/jun/03/eric-cantor/cantor-says-stimulus-failed-get-people-back-work/

The jobs bill has NO estimate of how many jobs they expect to create with our half a TRILLION dollars. And we're supposed to just fork it over, no questions asked? Seriously, Mr. President? ****ing seriously?

There are plenty of estimates put out on the President's job plan. Moodys, Macroeconomic Advisers, Goldman-Sachs, JPMorgan Chase.

I'm also sure the CBO will score it as well.

And don't for a second think of giving me that "I'm sure the president didn't know." Execs from Solyndra were there AT LEAST 20 times between September 2010 and April 2011. He knew, first hand. And pissed our money away anyway. (Again, dems, while ensuring the fat-cat private investors didn't lose a dime!!! Hooray for Obama taking care of the little guy!!!)

To say I'm irate doesn't even begin to cover it. Now that I've gotten it out of my system, I'll let the investigations and hearings play out. But perception is reality, and my perception is that this president is in WAY over his head.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but most of the activity on Solyndra was done by people under him. He was probably briefed on their situation when he did an event at the company, and he certainly met the people who run the company, but he's not involved in doing the details of their loan or anything like that. If you think that's the way you're ignorant if you think it does. Only the most important decisions make it up to the President.

Obama being in over his head doesn't match the facts. He's been very competent in response to natural disasters, like the tornados and hurricanes, much more competent than the previous administration. He's handled an extremely turbulent Middle East very well even as the conditions on the ground change on an hourly basis. He's been very strong on foreign policy overall. He's kept this country safe. Of course, a lot of that is also due to the work of people under him.

None of this means he's been politically effective, however.

---------- Post added September-15th-2011 at 01:47 AM ----------

Lets talk about the topic at hand, the administration at best completely botched this and demonstrated further incompetence, at worst there is some serious corruption here.

Between this, fast and furious, and the economy just doing diddly poo for 90 percent of America, this has been a terrible summer for the administration. The killing of Bin Laden seems like years ago

It has been a terrible summer for the administration, but you left out the biggest reason why: the debt ceiling debate. That thing killed consumer confidence and made Washington toxic. I'm pretty sure it contributed to the economic slow down we've experienced the last 3 or 4 months.

Obama was hit hard by it, but he's still holding up OK with approval in the low - mid 40s and he's still beating his opponents in head-to-head match ups.

---------- Post added September-15th-2011 at 02:00 AM ----------

I wont start with how limp the whole blame Bush thing is anymore - you had both houses and the pres.

I will say that the greatest tax receipts that we as a nation have had ever received was in 2007 - under Bush tax cuts I'll like to jab, and before Obama's assault on producers and wealth/job creators.

What assault? Their taxes are as low as they've ever been. Are you talking about when he called them fat cats? Get over it.

And are you saying the Bush tax cuts paid for themselves? Because even the Heritage foundation has walked back that claim.

"If there's one thing that economists agree on, it's that these claims are false. We're not talking just ivory-tower lefties. Virtually every economics Ph.D. who has worked in a prominent role in the Bush Administration acknowledges that the tax cuts enacted during the past six years have not paid for themselves--and were never intended to. Harvard professor Greg Mankiw, chairman of Bush's Council of Economic Advisers from 2003 to 2005, even devotes a section of his best-selling economics textbook to debunking the claim that tax cuts increase revenues."

Link

"There is no real dispute among economists that broad-based federal income tax cuts reduce revenue (except when tax rates are much higher than they are now)," said Alan D. Viard of the conservative American Enterprise Institute. "Revenue is lower than it would be without the Bush tax cuts -- liberal and conservative economists are in accord on this question."

Link

"The congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, using conventional analyses, says making the president's tax cuts permanent would reduce federal revenues in 2016 by $314 billion. That is more than 10 times what the Treasury analysis suggests tax cuts would generate by prompting more hours of work, more savings and investment and more efficient use of resources."

Link

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

But, we're supposed to cough up $500 BILLION for the jobs bill, with no estimates on how many jobs it will create, right? Or does your theory only apply when it's convenient?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/mark-zandi-obama-plan-would-add-19-million-jobs/2011/09/09/gIQAAx9kEK_blog.html

Mark Zandi: Obama plan would add 1.9 million jobs

Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, is frequently the go-to guy for both parties when it comes to analysis of various jobs proposals. So, what did he think of President Obama’s speech last night? Here’s the report: “The plan would add 2 percentage points to GDP growth next year, add 1.9 million jobs, and cut the unemployment rate by a percentage point.”

To be sure, Zandi is not totally smitten with the plan, arguing that it doesn’t adequately deal with the “ongoing foreclosure crisis and housing slump”—two things, he writes, that are “major impediments to the recovery.” On the bright side, it “would go along way toward stabilizing confidence, forestalling another recession, and jump-starting a self-sustaining economic expansion.”

The Wall Street Journal has some more reactions from economists on Obama’s proposals. Here are Goldman Sachs’ forecasters: “Thus, if enacted in its entirety, this proposal could shift the fiscal impulse in 2012 from -1.1% of GDP to +0.4% of GDP.

http://www.offthechartsblog.org/obam...and-ambitious/

Obama’s Plan: Robust and Ambitious

President Obama’s new, robust, and ambitious jobs plan is a well-crafted measure that would provide significantly more job and earnings opportunities for working Americans. Given the economic difficulties facing America’s families, Congress should enact it sooner rather than later.

The President did not estimate how many jobs it would create or save but, at about $450 billion, it’s clearly large enough to cut the unemployment rate over the next year or so. Moody’s Analytics’ Mark Zandi predicts the plan would add 1.9 million jobs in 2012 and cut the jobless rate — which now stands at 9.1 percent — by a percentage point compared to where it would otherwise be.

In fact, as the chart reveals, if Congress fails to pass any of the measures in the American Jobs Act, we should expect the unemployment rate to be slightly higher next year (9.3 percent). But with the AJA job-creation measures at work in the economy, the jobless rate would be 8.3 percent. That’s still too high, but it’s a marked improvement.

As expected, the President called for renewing the payroll tax cut and extending unemployment insurance benefits, both of which are scheduled to expire at the end of this year. But he also called for considerable extensions of both policies.

On the payroll tax break, he proposed raising the 2 percentage-point cut to 3.1 percentage points (half of the overall payroll tax on employees). The benefits of the tax cut to a typical worker earning $50,000 per year would grow from $1,000 to $1,550.

Employers also pay a 6.2 percent payroll tax, and the President proposed cutting that in half to 3.1 percent, capped at $5 million of payroll. In other words, employers would benefit from tax relief of up to $155,000. Since large businesses have payrolls well over the $5 million cap, the structure of this tax cut favors small businesses.

Edit: I see didn't see NoVaO's previous post.

Apologies.

[LadySkinsFan]

The government allowed wholesale outsourcing of jobs by not enacting a punative tax on the companies that outsourced jobs at American workers expense.

Also, why doesn't the Congress enact a tax law that says when a company or individual zeros out their tax obligation it stops right there instead of the current creation of a tax reimbursement below zero? That law alone would raise tax revenue without penalizing anyone except those who use every deduction, allowance etc. to get below zero. If one owes no tax, one certainly doesn't receive a refund below zero. And don't confuse "refund" with those who deservedly get refunds due to government's overwitholding.

[SkinsHokieFan]

I'm curious SHF: who's your choice in the GOP primary?

(You know I always respect your opinion.)

Ron Paul, and its not even close.

I think he is the only candidate I could vote for unless Hillary runs. While I disagree with Hillary on many things, at least she would be competent.

Right now its looking like I am going to sit out the '12 GE

[10fttall]

Also, why doesn't the Congress enact a tax law that says when a company or individual zeros out their tax obligation it stops right there instead of the current creation of a tax reimbursement below zero? That law alone would raise tax revenue without penalizing anyone except those who use every deduction, allowance etc. to get below zero. If one owes no tax, one certainly doesn't receive a refund below zero. And don't confuse "refund" with those who deservedly get refunds due to government's overwitholding.

Why do you hate poor people? I assume you are aware of how many people in this country pay no income tax, but get thousands from the IRS every spring for a mountain of various "credits?" Your selfish mean-spirited idea would deny millions the chance to get a bigger flat screen TV, newer smartphone, or the latest pair of Jordans; inbetween their food stamp issues.

[Fergasun]

This is a nothingburger. I just sat and watched as the Bush administration gave out billions in illegal loans to the car companies, and gave out illegal loans to the banks. It was called "TARP". In spite of the fact that there was excessive GAO, a Special Inspector General, and an Independent Congressional panel, none of these "oversight arms" ever came out and said that the money was improperly loaned.

CIT Group was provided with a $2.3B loan out of the TARP, and went bankrupt (I bet it was probably within a quicker timeframe than Solyndra). Yet no one really cared. Probably because the loan was Obama enacting/continuing GOP policy. Since this was Obama enacting pure Democratic policy, it's such an easy target. Yet take the Chrysler/GM loans. If Obama hadn't bailed them out would anyone be mad that money was flushed down the toilet by Bush?

I love how the right is pushing up this as a huge political scandal... if you want to make it a scandal you need to call your shot ahead of time. Was it clear at the time that Solyndra was not viable? I found one source on the web raising questions on Solyndra "Green Tech Media". Multiple articles between May and August. Searching Congressional websites, I was less successful. Senator Boxer and Representative Waxman had press releases touting the loan. So why didn't the GOP jump on this early and call their shot? Oh, but now they are all over it.

And Obama is the one ramping up his campaigning?

[PokerPacker]

You! Really. I'm pretty ****ing sure both the Afghan and Iraqi War were voted and passed Congress. How's is that illegal?

well, not really. We still have not declared war because congress is spineless, and rather than declare war, they decided to just say "do what you have to do, Mr. President, because we haven't enough spine to decide to declare war or not".

[Teller]

Created or saved. That expression was "created" because if they just used "created" their utter failure would be blindingly obvious, even to liberals.

And LSF, since you asked again, let me touch on Iraq. We had UN approval to go in. That inherently makes it legal. You may not agree with it, or how we got there, but we had international support. And saying that going into Afghanistan was illegal might just be the most ridiculous thing I've ever read on this board -- and trust me, there's a lot of competition.

Also, the lack of desire from the left to address the actual TOPIC of the thread is pretty damning in and of itself.

[Henry]

I will say that the greatest tax receipts that we as a nation have had ever received was in 2007 - under Bush tax cuts I'll like to jab, and before Obama's assault on producers and wealth/job creators.

In 2007 our tax receipts represented 18.5% of our GDP. That was the highest of the Bush Administration, to be sure, but lower than any of the six years before the Bush tax cuts took place. Considering that we were in the middle of two wars, it might have been a good idea to maintain the debt-reducing 19-20% range we had maintained during the Clinton era rather than dipping to a 53-year low of 16.1% in 2004 before creeping back up to that 2007 level ... all while the deficit ballooned.

[Rocky21]

A company received a U.S. backed loan guaranty and ended up going bankrupt. This kind of thing does happen. If someone believes something nefarious happened then it should be investigated. If the loan was properly underwritten and no one did anything wrong they shouldn’t have anything to worry about.

But all of this talk of scandal and the President’s personal involvement in this seems, well, kinda stupid.

[Predicto]

Also, the lack of desire from the left to address the actual TOPIC of the thread is pretty damning in and of itself.

Posts 13 and 18 did a pretty good job on it.

I also suspect that the responses you are getting have a lot to do with the tone you chose to set in your very first post. :whoknows:

[Corcaigh]

Posts 13 and 18 did a pretty good job on it.

I also suspect that the responses you are getting have a lot to do with the tone you chose to set in your very first post. :whoknows:

Agreed on both. Since when does trolling deserve a considered response.

[Predicto]

A company received a U.S. backed loan guaranty and ended up going bankrupt. This kind of thing does happen. If someone believes something nefarious happened then it should be investigated. If the loan was properly underwritten and no one did anything wrong they shouldn’t have anything to worry about.

But all of this talk of scandal and the President’s personal involvement in this seems, well, kinda stupid.

I'm glad they are investigating it.

The coordinated charge to label this a major scandal implicating the President isn't surprising either. After all, as H_H said, "To say I'm irate doesn't even begin to cover it. Now that I've gotten it out of my system, I'll let the investigations and hearings play out. But perception is reality, and my perception is that this president is in WAY over his head."

Fox and company are doing their best to create those perceptions, and it is working. H_H is a good example of how effective it is.

---------- Post added September-15th-2011 at 09:54 AM ----------

Agreed on both. Since when does trolling deserve a considered response.

I wouldn't call it trolling. Just emotional. H_H believes what he is saying.

Nevertheless, H_H didn't appear to want to talk about the facts of the Solyndra situation, he wanted to talk about how the Solyndra situation was a mirror reflecting the incompetence or even dishonesty of the Obama administration. Which, of course, gets emotional responses about the Bush Administration, which had a ton of similar failings (and to be honest, so has every administration since George Washington's).