The Left's National Vote Fraud Strategy Exposed

OK buckaroos, here's your next reading assignment.

The Left's National Vote Fraud Strategy Exposed.

And you'll never guess who's helping this. None other than your favorite anti-Christ and mine, George Soros.

Pour yourself a good stiff drink (you'll need it again, sorry) and be prepared to see what you can do locally to combat this effort to undermine our voting process and keep radical, left-wing Communist/Progressives in power.

The Solyndra Slip - Kaiser Admits His Greed

Well, things are certainly beginning to heat up in the "green energy" sector of our economy.

If you've been keeping track of this glorious experiment in command and control economics, certainly you're aware of the story of Solyndra, the solar-panel manufacturer that recently became financially insolvent after squandering over $500 Billion of your tax dollars. Now that there is a Congressional investigation, the facts behind this debacle are emerging at a furious pace, and none of them look very good for the Obama administration.

What we have here is a failure to understand how our free market is supposed to work, among other things, like political corruption in the White House, crony capitalism, favoritism, and a whole bunch of other things that the government shouldn't be doing.

Again.

In case you didn't already know, this administration, through the failed Stimulus Act, has funnelled billions of your tax dollars into companies that wouldn't normally have received startup capital through traditional means, namely presenting a viable business plan to investors. They're lining up at the door to the White House for a handout from Uncle Sam.

What has occurred in reality is that an awful lot of your money has gone to Obama's political cronies and money bundlers. What it adds up to is theft. Hope and Change indeed.

Without going too deeply into the sordid details, the government has decided that it will attempt to create a whole new sector of our economy. The only problem with that is, this sector has existed for over a generation and has yet to prove itself in the free market.

Normally, any sector must be able to sustain itself by generating wealth. The fact that this isn't happening in the green energy sector hasn't stopped many well-intentioned people in Washington from pumping money into it. The problem is that it isn't their money, it's yours, and mine. Funny, but I don't remember telling anyone I voted for to do this. How about you?

Ever since this whole "mankind is killing the earth" hoax began, a few brave souls have tried, with the best of intentions, to make some money from it. Nothing wrong with that, but ask yourself if, after more than thirty years of failure, it deserves to be propped up with your money instead of doing what other businesses do, namely, sustain themselves or go out of business, all on their own, without government subsidies. All the time.

It's a good thing that there are folks in Washington who now want to take a closer look at the distorted way this sector is being funded. To my knowledge, there is no other segment of the economy that "works" the way green energy works. What we're discovering, as the curtain gets pulled back on the process, is the Chicago Way of Corrupt Politics, transplanted to Washington by the current inhabitant of the White House.

There's only one thing to remember in all of this: if these "green energy" companies had a really good idea, it would have already worked in the free market. The simple fact that these companies depend upon government subsidies to start up and operate is evidence that they aren't viable.

It's along about this time that bring in somebody named Bill Clinton to share with us his expert economic analysis of the burgeoning green energy sector.

"This has to work economically," he said. "You have to come up with the money on the front end."

Um, Bill, that's not how it works, not out here in the real world, anyway. If it was a good idea, it wouldn't need tax monies. It would create its own.

Just so you know there, Bill.

I ran across this little video of one of Solyndra's principles, George Kaiser, openly boasting of his goal to secure as much of our money as possible from the Stimulus. (h/t Weasel Zippers and Ace)



Verun Serum, who posted this story initially, has this to say:

Frankly I can think of no better condemnation of the corruption and utter futility of the Obama stimulus then the fact that here you have one of the wealthiest philanthropists in America, a man with nearly $10 billion in personal assets, openly stating his intention to grab as much stimulus money as he possibly could, like every other pig at the trough. Is this the proper role of government, to take hard-earned dollars from tax payers (and their children and grandchildren) to fund the vanity projects of multi-billionaires, well-intentioned or not, who just so happen to have the right political connections? The $500 million to Solyndra is only the tip of the iceberg, I’d bet. How many other stimulus deals were greased by Kaiser and others like him?

I’m not the first to notice, but Obama is a bit of a fraud. Not exactly sure how he reconciles his tax the rich rhetoric with his Administration’s track record of deals like this. If you really believe the rich aren’t paying their fair share you might start by not forking over taxpayer dollars to your billionaire donors.

It gets better, much better. NRO points out this little nugget of legal information -

While Solyndra’s failure is an embarrassment for both parties, Kaiser’s foundation still stands to recoup a large chunk of its investment in the company, whereas taxpayers will recoup very little, if any, of the $535 million investment the White House made on our behalf. That’s because once Solyndra’s financial troubles became too obvious to ignore, the DOE negotiated a loan restructuring that gave priority status to private investors over taxpayers with respect to the first $75 million recovered in the event of Solyndra’s collapse. As Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations pointed out last week, this appears to be a blatant violation of federal law.

Toilet, meet my money. Money, toilet.

Quid Pro Quo or How Good Government Went Bad

The current stalemate in Wisconsin offers us a good lesson in how not to operate a government. Public sector union pensions are in the process of causing a genuine meltdown of the state’s budget, draining monies from needed infrastructure into pension plans that the rest of the working populace can only dream about. This budget crisis has been brewing for decades, with unions seeking ever-increasing benefits that seemed almost reasonable during good economic times. However, the tenuous nature of our economy, which has been teetering on the edge of fiscal responsibility for years, has awakened the good citizens of Wisconsin and America to the fact that we can no longer continue to give the unions each and every little thing their hearts desire. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker puts it plainly when he says, “We’re broke.”

One only needs to listen to Richard Trumka and his outrageous Socialist rhetoric to know that this has been planned.

While teachers call in “sick” and unscrupulous doctors write fake notes so the teachers can get paid to protest, the parents who have to take days off to tend to their children or pay daycare are not amused. The rest of the country is starting to see the unions, rightfully, as the spoiled children that they are. As the details of the unions’ demands emerge, we’re seeing that the public sector unions have an awfully sweet deal, with above average pay and benefits that the average American doesn’t have.

While the rest of us are tightening our belts, the unions are screaming that their rights are being taken away from them, that Governor Walker is Hitler, or a dictator like Egypt’s Mubarak, or any number of other false, immature accusations.

Cartoon by Phil Hands of the Wisconsin State Journal.

Wisconsin’s Democratic senators are no better, fleeing the state rather that performing their sworn duty to uphold the state’s constitution and effectively manage the budget.

Sports fans, this is exactly what happens when we choose the wrong people for elective office.

Mr. Boy, you ask, how do we know when we’ve done that? What are the signs of corruption in politics?

I thought you’d never ask.

It’s simple. It’s also Standard Operating Procedure in Third World Countries. One hand washes the other, scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours, or its most eloquent title, Quid Pro Quo. It’s called by several names, but the principle is the same.

And it’s not how our government is supposed to work.

In a perfect world, a political donor would contribute to a candidate on principle, and expect nothing in return except good, honorable and honest government in accordance with the Constitution. Everyone would benefit indirectly from this, as the economic tide would rise for all the ships.

But this has been twisted into corruption where today a donor expects (quite wrongly) a direct benefit from a campaign donation. Nowhere is this perversion of the Constitution more evident than in the waivers the Obama administration has given to cronies to avoid the onerous restrictions of ObamaCare, over 700 so far.

One could argue (quite rightly) that this action is unconstitutional. What’s the point of passing a law that only applies to Americans of a certain political affiliation? This action clearly runs counter to the Equal Protection Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment. You don’t need to be a constitutional scholar or a Supreme Court Justice to understand the simple principle that everyone is equal in the eyes of the law.

I’m frankly surprised that the Supreme Court hasn’t already weighed in on this aspect of the administration’s selective enforcement of the law. While I haven’t studied the details of the various states’ lawsuits seeking relief from ObamaCare, this should be the first item on the agenda. What use is the High Court if it will not to step in and warn this administration that it’s violating the Constitution?

It’s just this simple, either we adhere to the nations’ legal foundation, or we don’t. It’s written in plain enough language that people (except certain writers for the New York Times) can understand it.