Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I read every one of your posts and you failed to do what you thought you wanted to do, it seems.
Quote:
BTW...Have you been advocating the get the money out of politics and disagreed when the Supreme Court allowed corporations unlimited buying power over our elected officials?
The above quote is from a previous post. You did not answer my question which would have intiated the debate about throwing money into politics and Campaign Finance Reform. This corruption any cronyism that you have a problem with is systemic and not just a concern you should be having with this current administration and Obama. Could it be you didn't want to address my question and the bigger picture for partisan reasons or do you honestly beleive that this is not a problem and issue within the Republican Party as well? Seriously now.
Golly, gee Nanosolar was begun in 2002 and yet that $535 million loan went to Solyndra in 2009. Now somebody knew who to go to for a loan or somebody was trying to thank someone for the part he took in the election of 2008. I think it may well be the latter and that the Department of Energy was trying to help out an important money man named Kaiser.
Ok, I read your link and now I think you need to read mine before you throw out much more deflection crap.
You asked if a solar investment was sound for anyone, here is the question if you forgot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy
Getting back to the topic of the thread, is there some chance you can use your colorful speech to tell us how sound an investment in solar power like Solynga has been for anyone? Let fly and we will try to understand.
Answering your question is not deflection, but raving I didn't address questions in your head or paranoid ravings about the government is bizarre as hell.
Pretty sure that works both ways if you want to be totally honest about the situation.
Nope. I support Republican efforts on tax reform. I'm with them on housing reform. And in some cases, not all, I support their efforts on education reform.
Green energy is a fine thing but until we can make it viable we can't just shift to it. Maybe you need to spend the next year in Texas and get to experience the rolling energy blackouts caused by recent EPA regulations that caused 5 generating plants to close down in that state. They are going to be very short next summer although they have the most wind farms in the nation.
You can't just say we are going green and be there. It takes time and money to do the research to make it affordable.
Then you didn't just read what you quoted me and then replied to.
Green energy holds great promise, but we should let the private sector work it out. It will get there in time, but it is nowhere near the point now where you could depend on it to crews a significant amount of jobs today.
Nope. I support Republican efforts on tax reform. I'm with them on housing reform. And in some cases, not all, I support their efforts on education reform.
Your original quote used the quantity of "most" republicans and your rebuttal used the sample size of 1...being yourself...thats not really a valid example.
Green energy holds great promise, but we should let the private sector work it out. It will get there in time, but it is nowhere near the point now where you could depend on it to crews a significant amount of jobs today.
That is a nice goal, but the playing field is no where near balanced. In order to make it.
Exxon is one of the most subsidized energy producers in the world. They are also the most profitable (as of last yr.) corporation in America.
Take those away from Exxon, and give it to New Fuels companies, and it may take off.
The above quote is from a previous post. You did not answer my question which would have intiated the debate about throwing money into politics and Campaign Finance Reform. This corruption any cronyism that you have a problem with is systemic and not just a concern you should be having with this current administration and Obama. Could it be you didn't want to address my question and the bigger picture for partisan reasons or do you honestly beleive that this is not a problem and issue within the Republican Party as well? Seriously now.
If we manage to keep Obama another term I think that the balance in the Supreme Court will be upset, considering the appointments he has made. Of course, the "old" people there are libs, or were libs when appointed.
I don't see how we get any Campaign Finance Reform with people like Obama around who aren't above taking laundered money from all over the world, but it would be nice if we could.
BTW, where did he plan to get that Billion dollars from for the next campaign? Will there be as many "little" people around to give all those thousands of $20 dollar donations?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
