As If You Needed More

Incentive To Get This

Guy Out of The

White House........

"The voters would throw me out on my ass if they knew what I really

intended to do in a 2nd term, be sure to let Vladimir know that" 

Consider this one awful fact that Lee Stranahan brought up the other day on Twitter: 

We the People have already had several glimpses of things Obama would LIKE to do but presently can't because he still has to face the voters this November.  Remember that 'open mic' moment with the Russian president?

Once he gets past the 'last outpost of accountability' of the election and secures himself 4 more years where he doesn't have to worry about what the American people think about him any more, a President who has already demonstrated just how ideological he is will have free reign to do whatever he can to fulfill his progressive agenda.  

Progressives make up only around 20% of the American population.  To get power, progressive politicians have to convince people in the middle - the independents - to swing their way.  And they need A LOT of the independent vote to pull it off.  Since Conservatives make up around 40% of the population, they don't need to swing that many of the independents to carry the day in an election. 

Democrats have been very successful since the 1960's at swinging that independent vote their way.  Starting with Lyndon Johnson's re-election in 1964, the Democrat Party was hugely successful in convincing many Americans in the middle that their progressive policies were just the ticket for what was ailing the country.  From 1964 to 1968 we got the launching of the 'War on Poverty' and other social programs that tapped into American's compassion for the poor.  It's took billions of dollars spent through almost 30 years for many Americans to figure out creating a welfare state wasn't a good idea and didn't do a thing to 'solve' the problem of poverty.  

Democrats learned a lot from this however: launching compassionate-sounding big government programs with huge price tags shows Americans in the middle that they 'care' more than the other guys.  The other guys end up looking like hard-hearted skinflints that want the poor to starve, the sick to die, etc. etc. because they keep pointing out the country can't afford the new big-price program and also the new program doesn't really fix the problem anyway.  

Like in the present health insurance debate, instead of finding ways to open up competition and tweaking the free market to bring prices down, Democrats have pursued the strategy of trying to convince most Americans the 'compassionate' thing to do is give the government MORE control over the insurance market - when it's been precisely that which has caused the high prices in the first place.  

[Did you know the government has set it up so health insurance can't be sold across state lines, that policies have to cover everything under the sun, including cosmetic surgery, thereby driving prices up?  It's true - but don't hold your breath waiting for the very people that have been driving the prices up through gov. regulations to point this out to the public.  They've invested a lot of their time - and your money - into trying to convince people the greed of the free market itself is the problem, hence the need for more government control of it]

 It usually takes Americans bamboozled by this Democratic strategy some time to figure out this false compassion is being paid for by money taken out of their pockets and then mostly wasted.  When the accounting comes & it's shown how many untold billions of tax dollars were poured into the spiffy new compassionate programs vs. the results actually achieved, the voters realize they've been fooled.  It's happened so often that the strategy is now suffering from the law of diminishing returns.   It will only work several times before people figure out what you've been doing.  

Democrats have spent decades selling easy 'compassion' funded by other people's money in the form of tax dollars and these entitlements have now gone a long way towards driving up a national debt that is approaching $16 trillion.  

"I care more than you........and I'll prove it.....

WITH YOUR MONEY!"

And nobody has epitomized the ideology behind this strategy more than the current administration in the White House.  Despite huge opposition from the American public once they saw that 2,000+ page monstrosity of a bill, the Democrats plunged forward with it.  Many Americans weren't fooled any longer even though the Dems trotted out the same old strategy that had worked so many times before:  

"We CARE more about this problem, we can FIX it with this new program, and if you don't support our solution, you want old & sick people to die in the gutters."

This time many Americans didn't fall for it. They saw the price tag, realized it was their money that would be poured into this thing, and as usual when you looked closely you could see all the promises being made about this huge new boondoggle were untrue.  

Up to 26 million more people would be insured, but the cost is going to go DOWN? Yes, they actually claimed this.  If you like your plan, you can keep your plan & if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor? They claimed that - and it's not true at all.  Millions of seniors are going to lose their plans and Obama knew this when he was traveling around the country relentlessly selling this turd.  Thousands of doctors having looked at the bill have announced they will retire or stop practicing rather than be subjected to what's in it, so 'If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor' turns into 'If you like your doctor, you can have this OTHER doctor over here.'

"I can't wait 'til I get re-elected so I can stop lying to these morons."

Ideology drives the agenda, but to SELL the agenda they have to resort to some of the most blatant bald-faced lies imaginable.  And plenty of people watching this present administration in the past 3 1/2 years have noted how shamelessly they can lie and spin, get caught red handed, and then lie and spin some more.  

Here's the point I've been building to:  If Obama gets re-elected, he can DROP THE MASK at last. No more reason to lie.  No more reason to spin.  He & the Democrats will be able to simply be who they are let it all hang out.  No need to try to hide what they want or where they want to take the country by fooling enough of the independents any more.  

This is why it's more imperative than ever that Conservatives get out and make sure Obama doesn't get a 2nd  term.  

But let's say he does.  Let's suppose Romney has some huge meltdown and loses.  What's the best case scenario for an Obama 2nd term?  

It would be totally emasculating him by ensuring he has a Congress under Republican control to keep him in check for 4 years.  

Right now with the Senate under Democratic control Obama's got some leeway.  Take that away from him and put the entire Congress in Republican hands we can at least limit the damage he can do.  

"I will now order the DHS to stop enforcing this immigration law I don't like. 

What? No, I won't take any questions about this." 

Sure, he'll keep doing the same power grabs and unconstitutional executive orders he's been doing.  If the majority of voters return him to office he has no reason to stop doing that  since they got an eyeful of his doing that sort of crap in his 1st term.  Not like it would be a surprise.  WYSIWYG in a 2nd term.  We'd just have to accept the fact the majority of the voters didn't care what Obama's been doing to the Constitution.  

The amount of damage Obama could do to this country in a 2nd term - even with a Congress fully under Republican control - is enough to expend every effort to remove him from office next January.  Unilaterally re-writing the nation's immigration laws, and the other end-runs he's been doing around Congress & the Courts? You can expect 4 full years of that BS if he manages to pull this off.  

The next 4 months are crucial.  Let's all step up and CHANGE IT BACK.  

The Handwriting Is On The Wall:

Obama Not Only Loses.......

He's Gonna Get His Ass Kicked

In A Landslide

All the signs are there if you know what to look for.  Democrat members of Congress desperately running away from him, even to the point of publicly & LOUDLY announcing they will skip the Democratic National Convention in North Carolina?  


Roger-roger! 


http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-congress/2012/07/another-dem-will-skip-dnc-127973.html


What's the tally so far?

These are just the ones who's names and pictures I could find in a 10 minute Google search.  

Obama also lost 40% or more of the vote in 3 state primaries.  Remember - those were DEMOCRATS doing the voting.  

The talking heads on TV will keep talking louder, and the Progressive Left will bury itself deeper into it's nice warm cocoon, but this won't change what will happen. 

Barring a catastrophic failure on Romney's part, Obama will lose in a landslide.  We are at 40+ months with unemployment over 8%, and Obama himself had said if he didn't get it done by now this was a one term proposition.  

The media will keep desperately spinning it, but the people who's JOBS depend on this upcoming election are grounded in reality and they have read the handwriting on the wall.  Obama is TOXIC for them right now and they want nothing to do with him.  They certainly don't want to be seen on national TV at the DNC proudly nominating President Present for a 2nd term.  

An incumbent President who's losing the fund raising war, can't get above 47% in the polls, has members of his own party running away from him, and keeps trying to talk about ANYTHING but the dismal state of the economy & jobs is fighting a losing battle.  

In Case You Were Wondering If

This Current White House Had

Any Credibility Left...........

The answer to that is gonna have to be no.  


Let me see if I have this right...........let's follow how we got here with ObamaCare.


1. The Democrats introduce a 2,000+ page monstrosity of a boondoggle bill that nobody read.  Plenty of members of Congress realize they are going to lose their jobs if they vote in favor of this travesty, so it takes NINE LONG MONTHS of arm-twisting & bribery for Democratic leadership to get enough Democrats on board to pass it.  


2. To get the Affordable Care Act to pass, they have to call the individual mandate a 'penalty' or a 'fee'. They know if they call this thing a tax it has exactly 0% chance of ever passing.  So it's NOT a tax. When detractors & critics point out it FUNCTIONS like a revenue-raising tax they loudly insist over and over again, STOP SAYING THAT. IT'S NOT A TAX.


3. Now that the ACA passed in Congress & President Obama signed it into law, plenty of states challenge it in court.  With breathtaking chutzpah, the Administration's lawyers do a COMPLETE 180 DEGREE REVERSAL.  Realizing they are going to lose if they argue this thing on the basis of the Commerce Clause, the White House begins arguing to the judges that.........wait for it..........................................no, really....wait for it......................OBAMACARE IS A TAX AFTER ALL!


4. Reasoning that Congress may not have the power to order citizens to engage in certain types of commerce under the Constitution's commerce clause, the White House decides to try to argue that the individual mandate is legal as a TAX under Congress' power to enact new taxes.  


5.  To avoid having to strike down the ACA, five of the Supreme Court justices decide to rewrite it from describing the individual mandate as a penalty or fee and instead call it a 'tax', thereby making it legal. As the penalty or fee it was when the bill was passed, it's unConstitutional, so they get around this by simply changing the mandate to a tax and declaring it legal under the Congresses' power to tax.  


6.  Democrats & Progressives across the land rejoice at the news................and then go RIGHT BACK TO LOUDLY INSISTING THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE IS NOT A TAX. 


Think  I'm joking?  That I'm making this up?  Watch:

Hey David - the Court just ruled as a penalty the individual mandate would have been unconstitutional.  To keep it as law the Court just ruled it's not a penalty any more, it's a tax and so the ACA can pass judicial review only so long as it is implemented under Congresses power to TAX.  


You know who ELSE the White House is vigorously insisting to that this isn't a tax?  Are you ready for this? 


http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/white-house-roberts-obamacare-mandate-penalty-tax/story?id=16679772#.T-3vPHCSWbI


THAT'S RIGHT. They are telling the SUPREME COURT that just passed this thing as a tax, "Hey, you're WRONG about that, this thing isn't a tax, it's a penalty!"


We are beyond the realm of spin and into outright parody now.  


UPDATE:   Thanks to commentator MDGiles for pointing out something I had forgotten:  

You forgot an important part. To get the bill passed, and while still proclaiming it wasn't a tax, they used the reconciliation method, which is only used for tax bills.

That is correct.  Yet Republicans are supposed to be 'confused' about this.  This damn thing is basically whatever they need it to be at any given moment.  

In One Swift Stroke,

The Supreme Court Changes

ObamaCARE Into Nifty New

ObamaTAX

Alternate Headline: Progressive Left Loudly & Proudly Celebrates Largest Single Tax Increase In American History 5 Months Before November Elections


Yes, this is really going to work out well.  


Wait a minute, don't I remember somebody loudly & proudly insisting the Affordable Care Act WASN'T any kind of a tax or a tax increase?


Why.........YES! I believe I do!

Obama & the Dem leadership in Congress knew if they wrote ObamaCare as a huge new tax increase, it had exactly 0% chance of passing the Congress.  At it was, even with Democratic control of both the House of Reps & the Senate they had to fight for 9 long ugly months to get it passed as a 'fee'.


Then, when the ACA was challenged by many of the States in the courts, all of a sudden the  Democrats shifted the goal posts 180 degrees and insisted the ACA was in fact a tax and not a fee.


And today in a 5-4 decision, 5 of the Supreme Court justices agreed that ACA is in fact a new tax and is legal under the Congress' power to tax.


But few people are noticing what ELSE the Supreme Court did in it's decisions today.  While finding that the ACA is a tax, it ALSO found that the enforcement mechanism that the Federal Government was going to use to force states to be in compliance with the ACA was  unconstitutional.  That is, the Federal Government was going to withhold Medicare funds from states that refused to comply with the ACA.


By a 7-2 vote, the Court found that enforcement mechanism illegal under the law.


So states can still opt out of this thing and the Federal Government's attempts to force compliance took a big hit.


Also, as a 'fee' imposed from Washington nationally it would be harder to repeal ObamaCare.   As a nifty new tax under the Congresses' power to tax?  Congress can repeal ACA under it's own authority.  Because only Congress has the power to tax - or rescind taxes it has passed - this makes control of the Congress more vital than ever.


The only way to get rid of ObamaCare now is to get rid of the people in Washington that are enforcing it.  That means replacing Obama with Mitt Romney & flipping the Senate to Republican control while holding the House of Representatives.  That way in early 2013 we can finally flush this turd down the toilet.


Given that the Supreme Court just turned the ACA into the biggest single tax increase in American history just over 4 months from the election this November, the American people are going to have 4 months to realize this, see the effect this would have on the economy and on job creation, especially for small businesses.


Given the way they are crowing & celebrating this decision today, I'm pretty sure most of the Progressive Left hasn't figured this out yet.

Internet humorist & all around gadfly David Burge aka 'Iowahawk' gives them a not-so-subtle reminder: 

Some other things to consider: 


1. We're still stuck in what experts call the 'worst economy since the Great Depression' so of course this is the perfect time to hit the voters over the head with a huge tax increase, right after they got done kicking your ass over ObamaCare the last time they got the chance. 


2. Chief Justice John Roberts just pulled the pin on the ObamaCare grenade and lobbed it straight into Obama's lap.  Like it or not, THIS is the issue that's going to decide the 2012 Presidential election.  Oh yes.  I'd LOVE to see what kind of distractions Obama tries to get people's eyes off this sudden transformation of ObamaCare as a huge tax increase.  


Obama & the Democrats will NOT be able to run away from this or stick Republicans with the blame for this.  They own it. Totally.  Mitt Romney is going to have an incredible amount of fun reminding everybody ObamaCare is now a tax imposed on Americans by the very people who spent almost a year swearing it wasn't a tax. 


3.  The costs of ObamaCare already more than doubled since it was passed, from $940 billion to over $1.76 trillion in just the first decade.  So they lied about it being a tax, they lied about how much it would cost, and they lied about the effects the new law would have on health care, that premiums would go down and 'if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor'.  Virtually EVERYTHING they promised about this turd of a bill has turned out to be a lie.  


AND NOW IT'S BACK.  They barely got this thing passed back in 2009, then suffered huge voter outrage over it in 2010, and just in time for the big run up to the 2012 election, like a zombie rising from the dead to haunt them, HERE COME OBAMACARE AGAIN.  Now they have to talk about it again, and Obama is going to be forced to RUN ON IT.  


Doesn't matter if he WANTS to. He's going to be FORCED to.  And Pelosi & Reid and other top Dems will have to circle the wagons around him and try to sell this tax increase to the public in order to get Obama re-elected.  


I almost feel sorry for them.  


Almost. 

NBC New's Brand Continues

To Plummet:

Caught Making ANOTHER 

Deceptive Edit To A News Story

Steve Capus, Head of NBC News/MSNBC

Time to fire himself? 

Ever since Steve Capus took over NBC News/MSNBC they've been caught time and again deceptively editing audio and video to give their viewers false propaganda: 


1.  In 2009 MSNBC was caught deceptively editing videotape of a man legally carrying a rifle at an Arizona Tea Party rally.  The man was black, but Contessa Brewer and friends wanted to chat about.......white Tea Party racists with guns.  So.....a little fancy editing and presto! There's your story! 


First of all, here's the guy carrying the rifle at the rally talking to the local ABC News affiliate:

Now watch how MSNBC covered this and what kind of story they tried to turn it into:

2. In August 2011 Ed Shultz deceptively edited a speech by Texas Governor Rick Perry to make it appear that he was making a racist comment about President Barack Obama.  Perry's actual comment was that the national debt was a big black cloud hanging over the country.  Watch what Ed Shultz & NBC news did with that clip: 

3. Earlier this year both on NBC's Today show and on MSNBC they were caught deceptively editing the audio of George Zimmerman's 911 call to make it as racially inflammatory as possible.  MSNBC put up a transcript on it's website that had been edited to leave out the fact it was the 911 operator that brought up Trayvon Martin's race, not George Zimmerman: 


http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/03/28/MSNBC-ZImmerman-Ellipses


What MSNBC originally put up: 

What the 911 full transcript actually says: 

What MSNBC changed their report to read after they knew they'd been caught: 

Then, even worse, later on both MSNBC & The Today Show both aired selectively edited audiotape of the 911 call that EXACTLY MATCHED THE DECEPTIVE TRANSCRIPT EDIT PUT EARLIER BY MSNBC: 

Yet even after this - and FIRING THREE PEOPLE over this issue - NBC News & Steve Capus continued to insist this was just an 'error' and a 'mistake'.  


4.  Just the past week, while reporting for NBC News about Mitt Romney on the campaign trail in Pennsylvania, Andrea Mitchell deceptively edited his speech to make it look like he was freaking AMAZED by the touch-screen ordering system of sandwiches at a local WaWa.  Then Mitchell immediately tied this to the totally debunked myth of George H.W. Bush being astounded by a simple grocery store scanner.  


Only problem: the entire speech Mitt gave was up on Youtube and blogger SooperMexican saw what the editing had done.  Caught red-handed trying to create a new myth & then tie it to an old myth to make Romney look out of touch, Mitchell has steadfastly refused to apologize.  


First the video clearly showing just how deceptive this editing was: 

Called out on the carpet over this by numerous other news organizations, here's how Mitchell responded to the criticism: 

John Ziegler pointed out a likely reason why Mitchell refused to apologize for deliberately misleading viewers with a false story is......this is part of her regular bag of tricks: 

So the past few days it comes out that NBC News deceptively edited an interview with now-convicted child sex predator Jerry Sandusky, and that edited interview could play a key role in Sandusky's appeal: 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/24/us-usa-crime-sandusky-nbc-idUSBRE85N0OR20120624

(Reuters) - Lawyers for Jerry Sandusky sought a mistrial before his conviction for child sex abuse on the grounds that prosecutors showed jurors an inaccurate version of a bombshell NBC News interview with the former football coach, and the mistake may now form part of the basis for an appeal. 

In response to a subpoena, NBC News turned over three versions of Bob Costas' NBC News interview with Sandusky, which aired last November on different NBC shows.

One of those versions, which was broadcast on the 'Today' show, contained an erroneous repetition of a key question and answer - about whether Sandusky was sexually attracted to young boys, Nils Frederiksen, a spokesman for the Pennsylvania attorney general said on Sunday. 

The repetition, Sandusky's lawyers contend, made it appear to jurors that he was stonewalling. 

"It wasn't noticed by (NBC News), it wasn't noticed by us, but it became obvious when it played in court," Frederiksen told Reuters.
NBC News spokeswoman Amy Lynn confirmed this account on Sunday.

OK, I'm gonna have to call BS on this 'it wasn't noticed by NBC News' excuse.  

Should be obvious by  now this is no 'error', this is deliberate policy at NBC News.  Just like in the Zimmerman 911 call, there is no way you 'accidently' end up taking out only those words that leave you with the most inflammatory version possible.  


NBC News tried to float the excuse that the Zimmerman editing was 'accidental', a claim laughable on it's face.  And here they are doing it again.  Another totally 'accidental' editing that inflames a story to create the worst impression possible of the target.  


They dealt with this the other night on the Fox News Watch program. The part about NBC's editing of Sandusky's interview starts at about 14 minutes in: 

How many times are they going to get caught doing this before some sense of professional self-respect kicks in?  

Obama White House Spends 

$10 Billion Tax Dollars

To Create.....

355 Permanent Jobs

Alternate Headline: If A Republican President Had Wasted This Much Of Our Money, It'd Be A Huge Scandal Already

"I'm so much smarter than all those business owners in the private sector

that sometimes it hurts."

Want to see rank stupidity in action?  The biggest lie Progressives ever foisted on the public is that ivory tower academics & politicians who have never run a business or met a payroll know far more & are far better at 'creating jobs' than private sector business owners.  


That is not just untrue, it's stupidly untrue.  


And for all time, the Obama White House has now demonstrated it beyond all dispute.  


Whereas private sector businesses are risking their OWN money when they choose whether or not to expand, hire new people, open up new facilities, etc., Government bureaucrats & academics in Washington are risking OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY, tax money.  


Consumers that generate profits for businesses that lead to hiring and expansion are CHOOSING to use that businesses services.  Taxpayers don't have the luxury of refusing to pay taxes to the Federal & State & Local government.  


You would SUPPOSE this would mean that the government servants that get this tax money would be MORE responsible and careful with how they spend it.  But that isn't the case. 


While Progressives want to obsess over what greedy rotten capitalists choose to do with their own profits, they totally ignore the huge amount of waste, corruption and fraud that goes on when government flunkies get billions of other people's money to spend.  

It's not THEIR money so why should they give a crap how carefully it's spent? 


When Obama & Co. came into office, they had a detailed strategy - which Obama has expounded upon at length at every opportunity - about scaling back on oil, coal and natural gas fossil fuels while pumping up and encouraging the development of alternative sources of energy like wind & solar power.  They even have a cool phrases they threw around to sell the strategy, like 'green tech', and 'green jobs'.  


Now if they'd just left it at encouragement, that's fine. But they didn't. They not only decided to deliberately ramp down American domestic production of fossil fuels, they also decided to pour billions and billions of tax dollars into green tech firms in the hopes this would create a big wave of new 'green jobs' that would force the market to shift from the fossil fuels to be more favorable to green sources of energy.  


Now it's 3 1/2 years later after they started pursuing this strategy.  What are the results?  


First, from last week, here's a Congressman getting a Department of Energy spokesman to admit what the Obama White House now calls a 'green job': 

Keep that in mind when you hear this administration boast about how many 'green jobs' have been produced in the last 3 1/2 years due to the billions of tax dollars they've poured into these green tech companies.  Almost ANYTHING counts as a green job to these people because they realize how truly awful the numbers are and so they try to artificially inflate their abysmal results.  

"I don't understand your question. Just because we've wasted billions of the

taxpayer's money on failed green loans, you want to know if we'll stop 

pouring tax dollars into failing green tech companies?  Why would we stop?

It's not like this is our own money or anything.  We don't see the problem here."

How abysmal are the results?  Try this on for size: 


http://freebeacon.com/obama-administration-program-spent-10b-to-create-355-jobs-per-year/

The Obama administration spent $10 billion to create 355 renewable energy jobs per year, according to testimony offered Tuesday before Congress by a Congressional Research Services expert. 

Asked by Rep. Cory Gardner (R., Colo.) “how many jobs were created” in 2009 and 2010 under the 1603 renewable energy grant program authorized by the Obama administration, a CRS specialist in public finance admitted that $10 billion was spent to create 3,666 construction jobs over a two-year period–and only 355 jobs per year going forward. 

Dr. Molly Sherlock, the CRS specialist, first said the jobs total would depend on the type of job–and differentiated between “induced,” “direct,” and ”indirect” jobs–before Gardner asked for a straight number. 

“I just want to know how many jobs were created,” Gardner said during the hearing. 

“If you’re looking at the direct jobs, this one estimate has direct jobs created at 3,666 in the construction phase, and direct jobs created at 355,” Sherlock said. “Direct jobs would just be the construction jobs and the ongoing operations and maintenance jobs. But if you wanted to look at the supporting jobs in other industries then you’d want to look at the other figures.” 

“So for direct jobs—just if we look at the first year, this is average jobs per year, it’s 355 jobs per year—in two years, 355 jobs created a year, $10 billion?” Gardner asked. 

“That would be jobs per year going forward,” Sherlock responded, “so these would be jobs that would be retained, average jobs per year going forward, yes.” 

“For $10 billion?” Gardner clarified. 

“Yes,” Sherlock said.

Realizing how bad this testimony made the loan program look, the DOE sent a statement to the Washington Free Beacon: 

“The highly successful 1603 tax program has played a critical role in the dramatic expansion of America’s renewable energy industry over the past three years – supporting more than 30,000 renewable energy projects, leveraging more than $25 billion in private sector investments and creating tens of thousands of jobs in installation, construction and operation, as well as up and down the manufacturing supply chain,” said DOE spokesperson Jen Stutsman. “This program has helped to build infrastructure that will spur economic development and job creation in the country over the long-term and ensure the United States can compete in the global clean energy economy.”

Uh, Jen Stutsman?  Didn't your OTHER official spokesperson just testify before Congress that the program produced 355 direct jobs per year?  It's nice you want to fudge the figures by adding in temp construction jobs and all, but 'tens of thousands'?  


Molly Sherlock wouldn't even venture above 5,000 jobs total including all the temporary construction jobs. Permanent, direct jobs were only 355 a year.  

I also question the claim that this gov't loan program shelling out billions of taxpayer cash to these green tech companies has resulted in the 'leveraging [of] more than $25 billion in private sector investments  because if private investors were rushing $25 billion dollars of their own hard-earned cash into these green tech companies, why the hell does this gov't loan program exist in the first place?  


They've reached a point where they are simply going to tell us all huge whoppers and hope we swallow them.  

The only good thing to come out of this when the final accounting is done after these present clowns are all thrown out of office by the voters this November?


The final tally of just how much of our money they burned up on these stupid projects will be an eternal warning to the American public once and for all what happens when you listen to stupid Progressives who never worked in the private sector talk about how awesome they are at creating jobs and want billions of tax dollars to prove it.