4 ms·

Typical right-wing businessman: If he succeeds (with the benefit of tons of public financial support), all the credit is due to his brilliance. If he fails (d

by Bud 14y ago

Typical right-wing businessman: If he succeeds (with the benefit of tons of public financial support), all the credit is due to his brilliance. If he fails (despite all that public money), it's the government's fault for not supporting him even more and bailing him out. Oh, and btw, let's keep repeating the mantra: Big government is baaaaaad! Rich people must be coddled as job creators! Schilling is a douchebag.

protomyth 14y ago
Both sides of the political spectrum pull this stunt (e.g. Solyndra, Evergreen Solar). Crud like this is why I don't vote party lines. Actual businesses run by competent people create jobs. Big loans from governments or VCs distort who is actually good.
- unabridged 14y ago
  exactly, this is just corruption. politicians using public money to help their friends.
- Bud 14y ago
  Actually, despite Fox News' obsession with bashing the Solyndra events, Solyndra does not prove your point at all, nor is it at all related to my point or to what Schilling did. Solyndra received extensive private equity funding, in addition to federal investment that looked like a good deal at the time. It was also not run by left-wingers. So I'm not really sure what your point is. All investments can fail, and not all the failures tell us anything about politics. I of course agree that "actual" businesses which are "competent" create jobs, but it's not always easy to tell in advance what is actual and who is competent. Certainly, solar energy in general is an "actual" business. It should also be noted, since you took unsubstantiated potshots at the Obama Administration, that the vast majority of stimulus-related bets made by them have paid off handsomely.
  - protomyth 14y ago
    Your post could prove my point. I am not a fan of Fox News or CNN, but it seems to be thrown out their anytime someone criticizes how our tax money is spent. Sadly, this type of stuff isn't really new to American politics (go look at the election of 1800). The government itself said on Jan 9, 2009 (days before inauguration) that Solyndra wasn't loan worthy. It was rushed and costly. Even the NY Times (not known as a bastion of Fox News lovers) said[1] that "Government Accountability Office, which found that Energy Department preliminary loan approvals — including the one for Solyndra — were granted at times before officials had completed mandatory evaluations of the financial and engineering viability of the projects." Stimulus-related bets made by them have NOT paid off handsomely. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/us/politics/in-rush-to-assist-solyndra-united-states-missed-warning-signs.html?_r=2&ref=politics http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/us/politics/in-rush-to-ass...
olefoo 14y ago
You may be correct on every point; but are you adding anything substantive to the discussion beyond your emotions about the story?
- georgemcbay 14y ago
  Normally I would be inclined to agree with you but in this case I think the point is relevant given Schilling's extremely vocal stance as a "conservative".

by Bud 14y ago

protomyth 14y ago

Both sides of the political spectrum pull this stunt (e.g. Solyndra, Evergreen Solar). Crud like this is why I don't vote party lines. Actual businesses run by competent people create jobs. Big loans from governments or VCs distort who is actually good.

unabridged 14y ago
exactly, this is just corruption. politicians using public money to help their friends.
Bud 14y ago
Actually, despite Fox News' obsession with bashing the Solyndra events, Solyndra does not prove your point at all, nor is it at all related to my point or to what Schilling did. Solyndra received extensive private equity funding, in addition to federal investment that looked like a good deal at the time. It was also not run by left-wingers. So I'm not really sure what your point is. All investments can fail, and not all the failures tell us anything about politics. I of course agree that "actual" businesses which are "competent" create jobs, but it's not always easy to tell in advance what is actual and who is competent. Certainly, solar energy in general is an "actual" business. It should also be noted, since you took unsubstantiated potshots at the Obama Administration, that the vast majority of stimulus-related bets made by them have paid off handsomely.
- protomyth 14y ago
  Your post could prove my point. I am not a fan of Fox News or CNN, but it seems to be thrown out their anytime someone criticizes how our tax money is spent. Sadly, this type of stuff isn't really new to American politics (go look at the election of 1800). The government itself said on Jan 9, 2009 (days before inauguration) that Solyndra wasn't loan worthy. It was rushed and costly. Even the NY Times (not known as a bastion of Fox News lovers) said[1] that "Government Accountability Office, which found that Energy Department preliminary loan approvals — including the one for Solyndra — were granted at times before officials had completed mandatory evaluations of the financial and engineering viability of the projects." Stimulus-related bets made by them have NOT paid off handsomely. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/us/politics/in-rush-to-assist-solyndra-united-states-missed-warning-signs.html?_r=2&ref=politics http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/us/politics/in-rush-to-ass...

olefoo 14y ago

You may be correct on every point; but are you adding anything substantive to the discussion beyond your emotions about the story?

georgemcbay 14y ago
Normally I would be inclined to agree with you but in this case I think the point is relevant given Schilling's extremely vocal stance as a "conservative".