Home Energy and Environment Solyndra: Republicans Blame Obama for yet ANOTHER One of Their Babies!

Solyndra: Republicans Blame Obama for yet ANOTHER One of Their Babies!

676
4
SHARE

Over the past 3 years, we’ve seen Republicans repeatedly blame President Obama and the Democrats for one after the other of their own “babies.” A few examples:

*The Great Recession, which started on THEIR WATCH and was caused mostly by THEIR policies!

*The budget deficit and debt, both of which were racked up overwhelmingly on THEIR WATCH (Reagan and Bush 43 in particular), and which were mostly inherited by Barack Obama the day he took office.

*Rising income inequality, which is almost 100% their fault, as a result of their massive and sustained class warfare against working people and in favor of the super-wealthy.

*”Cap and trade,” which was a conservative, Republican, free-market idea coming out of the Reagan and Bush 41 administration, but then became Evil Incarnate once the Democrats started to champion it.

*The individual mandate, which was the Republican alternative to the employer mandate, but became Evil Incarnate once – you guessed it, once Democrats started to take ownership of it.

*The health care reform package, which is almost identical to both Romneycare AND the 1993/93 Republican alternative to “Hillarycare.” But now it’s all Evil Incarnate, because — yep, you guessed it, because Democrats are for it.

*Debt ceiling increases, which they used to vote for routinely, but are not anathema because – yep, you guessed it…

*An Arab-Israeli peace settlement based on the 1967 boundaries, which has been U.S. policy since 1967 – under Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush 41, and Bush 43. But now it’s Evil Incarnate, because – yep, you guessed it…

And now, there’s the Solyndra bankruptcy, which Republicans are pinning 100% on the Obama administration. Except for one thing: yet again, this was THEIR BABY!

That’s right, as Stephen Lacey details, the Bush administration created the 1703 loan guarantee program, under which Solyndra applied for a loan back in December 2006.  Then, in late 2007:

Solyndra was one of 16 clean-tech companies deemed ready to move forward in the due diligence process. The Bush Administration DOE moves forward to develop a conditional commitment.

Finally, in January 2009:

In an effort to show it has done something to support renewable energy, the Bush Administration tries to take Solyndra before a DOE credit review committee before President Obama is inaugurated. The committee, consisting of career civil servants with financial expertise, remands the loan back to DOE “without prejudice” because it wasn’t ready for conditional commitment.

As if all that’s not enough to prove that Solyndra was “their baby,” there’s also the fact that this company “partly backed by the conservative Walton family had received a loan guarantee from the [Bush Administration] Department of Energy.” More broadly, this wasn’t partisan at all, as “[p]rivate sector investors – who put more than $1 billion of their own money on the line – also saw great potential in the company.

Of course, just as with “cap and trade,” the “individual mandate,” health care reform, etc., etc., none of these facts will stop Republicans from disingenuously and hypocritically attacking President Obama. It’s our job to push back. Fortunately, as is almost always the case when it comes to Republican attacks, the facts are on our side.

P.S. One more thought: consider who benefits from this vicious, sustained, opportunistic attack on solar power and an on clean energy in general.  Gee, that’s a tough one. Not. I mean, c’mon, we all know that Dirty Energy interests – Big Coal, Big Oil, etc. – have it in for solar, as well as for the Democrats. We also know that Dirty Energy has pretty much bought and paid for the Republican Party, including people like Dirty Energy lobbyist/shill George “Felix Macacawitz” Allen. Any further questions regarding what’s behind all this nonsense?

  • Clemgo3165

    Is the source of many, if not the majority, of our issues.  This morning it the coverage on NY-9 was all about an “up yours” to Obama, without any specificity as to what the “up yours” was about…and that it might not be ALL about Obama in the first place.

    There’s not nuance in news coverage any more, unless you’re watching PBS or listening to NPR.  And I worry about “us,” there seems to be no interest in nuance either.  No need to understand the issues before making a decision or voicing an opinion; no need to reconcile belief with actual facts; no desire to discover the truth of the situation.  More and more I’m seeing people who, when presented with verifiable facts, will defend their belief as opinion, one to which they are entitled apparently, regardless of reality.

  • pol

    and YES, it made it sound like the stimulus money paid here was a bad investment. It didn’t tell the rest of the story.

  • relawson

    Blame Bush, Obama, Clinton – whoever.  Matters little where blame lies.  What matters is that people haven’t connected the dots and figured out that our trade agreements with China doom companies like Solyndra.  

    Be it the currency peg, dumping, China’s subsidies of the industry, labor rights violations, lax environmental regulations – or any of a number of disparities that give them an unfair trade advantage.  Until there is major political support for balanced trade we can expect more of the same.  We can sugar-coat it however you like, but that is dirty old protectionism which we need to start getting comfortable with.

    Warning: Every time someone brings up Smoot-Hawley I kick my dog.  For the sake of my poor dog, don’t bring up this stupid argument that is an example of revisionist history at its best!  I don’t mind debating free trade and protectionism, but Smoot-Hawley has really become an excuse for people not to think critically about the issue.