Jump to content




Photo
- - - - -

Solyndra: Obama administration asks company to postpone layoffs


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
21 replies to this topic

#13 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • Joined: 01-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 13,096
  • Reputation: 2,400
HUDDLER

Posted 15 November 2011 - 03:49 PM

Any scarier than the Obama, Reid, Pelosi, experiment, whose benefits we are now enjoying?

#14 Claws

Claws

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 29-September 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,100
  • Reputation: 15
HUDDLER

Posted 15 November 2011 - 04:36 PM

Maybe if the Bush Administration had a actual vested interest in Enron they might have?

What the hell is a Solyndra investor adviser? Would be just a bit more believable if they had, you know, something from the DoE on this.

Not saying it's not true but this is really just another anecdote. I agree that from what it says, the people at DoE wanted to hold off on the announcement for their own purposes, but I don't understand what you are riled up about, other than the fact that the Dems didn't want to provide hysterical folks like you more ammunition for what is apparently nothing more than a failed business that the government had an active interest in. Any investor group can make these requests, not just the government - and do all the time.

Your post isn't a complete fail (refreshing), it's just another one putting the cart before the horse.


So then it's politics?

#15 venom

venom

    oneinfiniteconsciousness

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,931
  • Reputation: 536
HUDDLER

Posted 15 November 2011 - 05:41 PM

You are sounding like a boring broken record. When I said it should be looked at, I meant it.

But if you think I would ever vote for the likes of Gingrich or Cain, then yes, I would vote for Obama time and time again. Romney....theres not much difference between them, but the idea of the current, completely irrational House paired with a Republican President would be a pretty bad idea.


What's fundamentally off-base about this comment is that you're implying there are differences between said candidates. Obama, Gingrich, Romney, Cain, etc are all the equivalent of eachother. Due to this fact, any vote for any one of them doesn't matter because you're still voting in an enabler for the status quo occupation and corruption of this country by the global elite.

Edited by venom, 15 November 2011 - 07:18 PM.


#16 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 24,926
  • Reputation: 2,616
SUPPORTER

Posted 15 November 2011 - 09:02 PM

Yes, I'm voting for the next President. If "enabling the status quo" means "keeping things I appreciate going" then yes you are totally right.

#17 Panthers_Lover

Panthers_Lover

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,121
  • Reputation: 187
HUDDLER

Posted 17 November 2011 - 10:06 AM

Maybe if the Bush Administration had a actual vested interest in Enron they might have?

What the hell is a Solyndra investor adviser? Would be just a bit more believable if they had, you know, something from the DoE on this.

Not saying it's not true but this is really just another anecdote. I agree that from what it says, the people at DoE wanted to hold off on the announcement for their own purposes, but I don't understand what you are riled up about, other than the fact that the Dems didn't want to provide hysterical folks like you more ammunition for what is apparently nothing more than a failed business that the government had an active interest in. Any investor group can make these requests, not just the government - and do all the time.

Your post isn't a complete fail (refreshing), it's just another one putting the cart before the horse.


You're always good for a morning chuckle ... thanks.

#18 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 24,926
  • Reputation: 2,616
SUPPORTER

Posted 17 November 2011 - 12:41 PM

you are welcome.

For failing to provide anything of substance again ... thanks.

#19 Panthers_Lover

Panthers_Lover

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,121
  • Reputation: 187
HUDDLER

Posted 17 November 2011 - 12:58 PM

you are welcome.

For failing to provide anything of substance again ... thanks.


Just following your lead.

#20 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 24,926
  • Reputation: 2,616
SUPPORTER

Posted 17 November 2011 - 01:03 PM

So...again...what exactly are you disagreeing with me on? What did I say that was not true?

Or is it just that you've already made up your mind without any kind of actual investigation, no inditements, no guilty pleas, nothing, that the version of events you feel happened is true, well, just because it is?

#21 Panthers_Lover

Panthers_Lover

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,121
  • Reputation: 187
HUDDLER

Posted 18 November 2011 - 01:10 PM

So...again...what exactly are you disagreeing with me on? What did I say that was not true?

Or is it just that you've already made up your mind without any kind of actual investigation, no inditements, no guilty pleas, nothing, that the version of events you feel happened is true, well, just because it is?


Because you always feel that way when the other party is involved ... always.

#22 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 24,926
  • Reputation: 2,616
SUPPORTER

Posted 18 November 2011 - 02:28 PM

So you are not disagreeing with me, you just think my arguments have no merit because I don't rail against the administration every time someone throws something at them. I've already said, and repeated, that yes, this needs to be looked into, but you all keep ignoring that in favor of crap like the post above.