Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (114078)	9/28/2011 5:32:55 PM
From: locogringo	2 Recommendations Respond to of 224749

Yo, kenny_troll, tell me what you think of my new conspiracy theory. Obama purposely spent all his goodwill on the phony baloney Obamacare. Obama knows it's going to be struck down, and he wants it struck down before the next election, which is why he is now rushing it to the Supremes. He will use the backlash against the SCOTUS, as in the 2000 election, to fire up the dopey liberals and ignorant dems to have a chance at being re-elected. It won't work. It's the economy, STUPID, and nobody cares about Gore or George Bush right now.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (114078)	9/28/2011 6:11:58 PM
From: Hope Praytochange	3 Recommendations Respond to of 224749

kennytroll dont worry about our candidates -- read this: Message 27667297 it could be an election poster

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (114078)	9/28/2011 7:22:33 PM
From: chartseer	Respond to of 224749

Why in the world would the tea party rescue a bleeding heart? You know like in bleeding heart liberal who have yet to learn "the road to hell is paved with good intentions".

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (114078)	9/28/2011 7:25:51 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie	3 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 224749

Democrats hope that the Tea Party comes to the rescue of Rick Perry. I bet the Democrats do hope just that. Instead, the tea partiers are likely to have moved on from Perry and are now focusing on the democrats' worst nightmare. BWAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAAAHAAAA!

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (114078)	9/28/2011 11:19:51 PM
From: Hope Praytochange	2 Recommendations Respond to of 224749

Solyndra Said to Have Violated Terms of Its U.S. Loan Article Video Documents Comments (214) MORE IN BUSINESS » Email Print Save ? More smaller Larger By DEBORAH SOLOMONSolyndra LLC had such steep financial problems in late 2010 that the company violated terms of its loan-guarantee agreement with the Department of Energy and technically defaulted on its $535 million loan, according to people familiar with the matter. Report on SolyndraSee the Congressional Research Service's report on the solar-panel maker. View Document More photos and interactive graphics The failed solar-panel maker, which is under numerous criminal and congressional investigations, ran so short of cash in December 2010 that it was unable to satisfy certain terms of its U.S. loan agreement, these people said. The agreement required Solyndra to provide $5 million in equity to a subsidiary building its factory but cash-flow problems prevented those payments. WSJ's Ryan Tracy reports a new Congressional report says warnings about Solyndra's competitive abilities came out before the government awarded the company a $535 million loan guarantee and the company's subsequent collapse. The Energy Department ultimately restructured the loan agreement to help keep the company afloat and Solyndra continued to draw money from its loan. Solyndra's cash-flow problems in late 2010 had previously come to light but it was not known that the company technically defaulted on its loan and violated its agreement with the U.S. government. The company's financial problems prompted the Energy Department early this year to allow it to reshuffle its debt. Under the arrangement, private investors agreed to provide a new $75 million loan and won the right to be paid ahead of the government if the company was liquidated. The default is the latest indication of the serious financial troubles afflicting California-based Solyndra, which filed for bankruptcy protection earlier this month. It will likely add to questions surrounding the Obama administration's backing for the company even as its financial problems mounted. Administration officials have defended the initial loan guarantee and subsequent restructuring, saying they were trying to protect taxpayers. Jonathan Silver, executive director of the loan program, recently told lawmakers the government faced the difficult choice of either forcing Solyndra to close its doors or approving the restructuring to give it "a fighting chance at success and the government a higher expected recovery on its loan." On Tuesday, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Mary Walrath of Delaware cleared the way for Solyndra's assets to be auctioned next month. The company was the first to receive a loan guarantee under a program begun by President George W. Bush and expanded as part of President Barack Obama's 2009 economic stimulus package. Republicans have accused the Obama administration of rushing the guarantee for political reasons, and emails have surfaced showing administration officials ignored warning signs about the company's health. Solyndra's problems came to a head in November 2010 when it told the Energy Department it needed $150 million to make it through early 2012, at which time it believed its cash flow would improve. On Dec. 1, 2010, it was unable to make a $5 million payment to its subsidiary and technically defaulted on its loan. The loan was officially restructured in February 2011, giving the company enough money to carry it through August. The company, which had drawn down $475 million of the U.S. loan as of Dec. 31, 2010, ended up borrowing $527 million before its bankruptcy. Rep. Cliff Stearns of Florida, who is heading the Republican congressional investigation into the company, said, "Solyndra ran out of cash in December 2010, yet DOE continued to ignore the red flags and astonishingly doubled down on a bad bet and restructured the loan, further putting taxpayers at risk for what could now be a half billion dollars." Concerns about the program and its risk controls were raised several times by the Energy Department's inspector general, Gregory Friedman. In a March 2011 report, Mr. Friedman said his office "found that the Loan Guarantee Program could not always readily demonstrate, through systematically organized records, including contemporaneous notes, how it resolved or mitigated relevant risks prior to granting loan guarantees." A report in 2009 also faulted the loan-guarantee program's controls. There are also questions about whether the Obama administration should have known about Solyndra's problems even before the loan guarantee was made. In a previously undisclosed Sept. 9 report, the Congressional Research Service said that by the time of the September 2009 guarantee one of the company's key advantages—the fact it didn't use high-priced polysilicon as competitors did—had disappeared. Polysilicon cost more than $400 per kilogram in 2008 but dropped to slightly more than $50 per kilogram in September 2009, the report said. White House officials received assurances from Solyndra as recently as May 2011 that its finances were solid, with the company dismissing concerns raised in media reports. Mr. Silver, in a radio interview in May, said Solyndra was employing more workers than in 2009 and added: "The story has been a little bit misunderstood."

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (114078)	9/29/2011 12:46:07 AM
From: Paul V.	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 224749

Kenneth, Democrats hope that the Tea Party comes to the rescue of Rick Perry. Have you heard anyone on this radically conservative Republican site stress what they would have done differently during the Bush II rein to reduce the debt which his administration accumulated from the multiple wars he started in IRAQ, and Afgan, eliminating the taxes on the extremely wealthy, in addition to the deregulations of the financial institution which led to the financial crisis in Sept. 2008? Nor, have I heard how they would protect those on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid from cuts while reducing our debt. All I have read is Obama is a poor President!!!! It demonstrates to me that they have no idea what actions they would take, nor what any elected President should take to create jobs and what skill sets jobs of employees are needed to fill those created jobs which they identify. Forget moving manufacture jobs from China, India or Africa back to the US. The possible erosion of unions and salaries in the US will continue to spiral downward until the salaries in China, India and Africa equalize with the downward spiral of the US salary and fringes. I see many individuals working at retail stores at the present times at a tremendous lower wage and fringes than what they were making, that is if they can get work. I bet, each person on this site could name individuals who now are earning less than what they were previously earning. Maybe, if they are family members these individuals can move back home with their parents. Thanks, TEA Party Republicans! OBama, let the TEA Party Republicans shut down the Federal Government for 50 work days. Then, maybe the TEA Party Republicans would learn their lesson as the public riots would occur by those receiving social security, medicare and medicaid and those who are in jail. Sometimes mass action has to be taken.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (114078)	9/29/2011 10:24:37 AM
From: locogringo	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224749

Dems: Obama 66%, Hillary 27% All this talk about Republicans not being satisfied with their choices for a presidential nominee overlooks the obvious: Many Democrats are just as unhappy with their choice: President Barack Obama. A Fox News Poll found 27% of Democratic voters would back Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama; 66% would vote for him. An overwhelming majority of Republicans are satisfied with their choices, with only 7% saying they are not impressed at all. 63% of Republicans said they are “very” or “somewhat” impressed by their party’s field of candidates. blogs.dailymail.com