Reading between the Lines of Obamajobs Proposal…..It’s a Jobs bill for Attorneys

The Trojan horse for trial lawyers in Obama’s jobs bill

 

by Ed Morrissey   at HotAir

“A little-known provision in the jobs package proposed by Barack Obama will certainly create some jobs — in the trial lawyer industry.  The Hill’s Pete Kasperowicz notices that the bill would make it illegal for businesses to discriminate against the already-unemployed while making hiring decisions, a provision that will almost certainly keep businesses from taking any risk in expansion until absolutely necessary:

President Obama’s American Jobs Act, which he presented to Congress on Monday, would make it illegal for employers to run advertisements saying that they will not consider unemployed workers, or to refuse to consider or hire people because they are unemployed.

The proposed language is found in a section of the bill titled “Prohibition of Discrimination in Employment on the Basis of an Individual’s Status as Unemployed.” That section would also make it illegal for employers to request that employment agencies take into account a person’s unemployed status.

It would also allow aggrieved job-seekers to seek damages if they have been discriminated against. This provision in particular prompted Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) to argue that Obama’s proposal is aimed at creating a new, special class of people who can sue companies.

“So if you’re unemployed, and you go to apply for a job and you’re not hired for that job, see a lawyer,” Gohmert said on the House floor. “You might be able to file a claim because you got discriminated against because you’re unemployed.”

When people see this, especially those who like Obama and his team have never run a business, their first impression might be, “Well, golly, that seems fair.”  Anyone who has ever dealt with the hiring process as a business owner or manager knows differently.  The EEOC already has anti-discrimination laws in hiring and compensation for innate characteristics of applicants such as gender, age, ethnicity/race, and in most states sexual orientation.  Those laws put an onerous burden on employers to essentially prove themselves innocent when those who don’t get hired file complaints and lawsuits.  Discrimination is the easiest claim to make and nearly impossible to defend without spending a fortune on data collection, advertising, training, and legal fees.

Employers already know that questions about age, marital status, religion, and the like are out-of-bounds during job interviews because of how easy even innocent questions on these topics will bolster later claims of discrimination.  This law would threaten to make the topic of  job history off-limits as well.  It’s absurd to think that recent job history is somehow an unfair criterion to use when evaluating competing candidates for a position.  Unless the job involves unskilled labor, a candidate who has not worked in two years will not be as valuable to a company as one that has maintained his or her skills up to the moment.  If businesses are no longer allowed to evaluate candidates based on objective value, then what are they supposed to use for hiring criteria?

This is no small point for employers, either.  I spent almost 15 years as a hiring manager, and I know from experience that there is a strong correlation between stable employment histories and successful hires.  That was as true in recessions as it was in boom times.  At my last firm, that correlation was so strong that our HR team would question any hiring choice with any kind of spottiness in the employment record.

All this provision does is give those who don’t get the position a big invitation to file a lawsuit, especially against the deep-pocketed companies we’re hoping to convince to hire people now.  That will certainly benefit the lawyers who take these cases in order to get a piece of the shakedown money they can get out of these companies, but all that does is heighten the risk of hiring for businesses enormously.  If a company has a position that attracts 20 applicants, they have to consider the possibility that the new hire will cost them compensation for one employee and settlements for 19 non-employees, unless the business goes out of their way to hire the person who has been unemployed the very longest and therefore doesn’t have the same market value for their labor or for the company.

How many businesses will offer new positions in this kind of regulatory and legal climate?  Only those who absolutely cannot afford to not hire, and the inevitable costs of fighting the claims that arise will ensure that they won’t have the cash to do any hiring for a while afterward.

No one who is serious about setting an environment for job creation would include a Trojan horse like this in a jobs bill.  This is nothing more than a payoff for trial lawyers and a pander to those unfortunate people who have been out of work for a long time.  The latter might think that Obama’s protecting their interests, but he’s really just guaranteeing that they won’t ever see the kind of job creation that would put them back to work.

Update: A Hot Air reader reminds me that not all trial lawyers are bad guys.  His e-mail was pretty long, so I’ll just cut to the conclusion:

I agree that a provision making not hiring the unemployed illegal is a bad idea, and I suppose I don’t expect you to sing the praises of trial lawyers any time soon, but some acknowledgment of the role we do play in maintaining a free society (and allowing a free market to operate with less regulation because people and corporations are held responsible for their actions!) would be both responsible and appreciated.  Either way, keep writing and I’ll keep reading – I enjoy the site, and your writing in particular, immensely.

Well, consider it done.  I agree with this statement, and in fact, uh, some of my good friends are trial lawyers.  (It’s true!)  But it’s also true that the personal-injury industry as a whole has made it more difficult to do honest business, too, and that’s especially true in areas like hiring.  Making businesses even more susceptible to shakedowns where no real wrong has occurred is bad policy and just plain counterproductive to a free society and a free market, and eventually becomes a backdoor way to transfer wealth by force from the productive to the unproductive, which is only lucrative in the end to those attorneys who shepherd the wealth (and keep a good chunk of it for themselves).”

Finding the Poison in the Koran….go TheQuran.com

“Don’t Burn it;  Read it”     from the Gates of Vienna

by   Baron Bodissey

“When people become aware of the dangers of Islamization, they tend to take an interest in the Koran. Rather than rely on what the media or Muslims tell them, they decide to examine Islam’s holy book for themselves, and turn to the internet for help.

Needless to say, the best resources on the Koran are on Islamic sites. You can find anything you want from the Koran, in any language. However, the presentation at such sites is from a Muslim point of view, and doesn’t generally point the reader to the wife-beating or Jew-killing or infidel-beheading verses.

That’s not true of TheQuran.com. It contains detailed easy-to-use analysis of the Koran, produced by Arabic-speaking scholars from both Christian and apostate backgrounds. It is one of the more useful reference sites on the subject that I’ve come across: you can look up verses by topic, or you can search on keywords, or simply browse the contents. It also has a series of articles on particular suras and verses of interest.

As the main page says, it is “…a site for all things related to The Quran. This is the first site of its kind to provide a unique interpretation of The Quran unclouded by the myths and legends that surround Islamic heritage. TheQuran.com is the perfect site for anyone with the desire to study The Quran beyond the boundaries drawn by interpreters who are unwilling to contradict traditional Islamic teaching and refused to subject The Quran to literary and scientific critique, either due to their Islamic faith or weakness in understanding the Arabic language of the Quran.”

Also:

A new section has been added to this site to allow the visitor to view all the verses from the Quran relating to specific topics such as jihad, Christians, Jews, women, terrorism and others. You can view the list in different languages and translations.

On this site all registered users have the ability to comment on every abrogation, comparative reading, critical analysis and article. Registration is free.

Visit the Read section to read the Quran in multiple languages and view the commentary and analysis.

At the TheQuran.com you can:

• Examine many of the historical variant readings of the Quran
• Read The Quran more clearly and accurately
• See abrogated verses alongside explanations within the text.
• Learn more about the history of the Quran.
• Examine the current sequence of the Quranic chapters in comparison to other historical codices.
• Research many of the grammatical, historical, and scientific errors in the Quran.
• Examine a variety of internal contradictions within the Quran.
• Enrich your knowledge concerning the teaching of the Quran in areas such as; status of women; treatment of people of other faith; Jihad; and much more.

Plus, you will find many beneficial articles, resources and links to material that will increase your understanding of The Quran. Our goal is to make The Quran more easily accessible and understood while basing all commentary on authoritative Islamic sources.

In the future, visitors will be able to search for specific subjects and keywords within the text and participate in discussion boards! Due to ongoing scientific development and literary dialogue the content of our site will be continually updated with the latest articles and discussions related to The Quran. We welcome comments and suggestions from our visitors as we strive to make this site as user-friendly as possible.

The site’s owners are also promoting their book, The Qur’an Dilemma:

A book of terror or a book of peace? An inspired text or a political agenda? How is one to know the truth about the Qur’an? Where does one even begin? How can an English speaker ever hope to wade through the history, the translations, the sects, and the commentaries to begin making sense of the issues?

During the last decade, interest in Islam and the teachings of the Qur’an has grown globally. In order to allow Westerners to investigate the truth about Islam, this research text was translated from Arabic to give English speaking readers the opportunity to see the Qur’an with clear lenses that are not fogged by propaganda or missionary zeal. This book provides the background of the Qur’an in an objective manner. It also presents the text of the Qur’an with parallel commentary, addressing important issues that Muslim scholars have wrestled with throughout the centuries, shedding light on their attempts to solve them and giving a rounded view of the various schools of thought.

The critical approach in this book is inspired by the courageous tradition of those who have dared to analyze the Qur’an throughout history, while also incorporating the contemporary intellectual productions available in Arabic and foreign sources. The discoveries made through these scholarly critical methods are directed to non-Muslims and Muslims equally:

To non-Muslims who want to unravel the mysteries of Islam, this book presents information that Islamic resources rarely disclose—to allow those who seek the truth to comprehend the full picture with all its outlines, colors, and dimensions.

To Muslims who seek genuine choices far from the culture of “indoctrination,” this book opens a world of understanding to them, so that they can decide for themselves their intellectual and spiritual paths.

The Quran Dilemma (Volume One) — available now both in English and in Arabic — covers the first nine suras (chapters) of the Quran. The remaining suras will be covered in Volume Two, due for release in 2011. Articles and commentary found throughout this masterfully executed book — which explain and analyze each sura — are based on authoritative Islamic sources.

I haven’t really begun to access all the resources at TheQuran.com. I recommend that readers visit the site, and discover for themselves what else can be found there.

Mad Scientists Seek to Erupt Volcano to “Cool” the EARTH

Fake Volcano Can Solve Climate Problems,

Scientists Say

Reuters

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/09/14/fake-volcano-can-solve-climate-problems-scientists-say/#ixzz1Y4sghCh3

 

“There will be an unexpected sight high in the skies over the British county of Norfolk next month: a huge balloon attached to the ground by a giant hosepipe.

It isn’t obvious, but it is the first small step in an experiment which aims to re-create the cooling effect of erupting volcanoes on the earth’s atmosphere.

Scientists and engineers from the universities of Bristol, Cambridge and Oxford are behind the three-year, 1.6 million pound ($2.5 million) project called Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering (SPICE).

The scheme will assess the feasibility of so-called solar radiation management (SRM) by mimicking volcanoes when they erupt. Eruptions can both warm and cool the Earth’s climateFix, depending on how sunlight interacts with volcanic material.

SRM works on the assumption that some eruptions expel particles into the upper atmosphere, bouncing some of the sun’s energy back into space and thereby cooling the earth.

“In 1991, a large eruption at Mount Pinatubo injected around 18 million tons of SO2 (sulphur oxide) to a 30-km altitude,” project leader Matt Watson told reporters.

“That had the effect of cooling the global climate by around half a degree over two years.”

KILOMETERS OF HOSEPIPE

Next month’s experiment, to be held at a disused airfield in Sculthorpe in north Norfolk, will pump water through a 1-km hosepipe into an air balloon to test the engineering design and the effects of wind.

If there are no hiccups, the team aims to do more 1-km tests next year. It will also work on calculating and designing a potential full-scale balloon project, which would pump sulphates and aerosol particles instead of water.

That would require a 20-km pipe strong enough to pump sulphates to a balloon the size of Wembley football stadium — at twice the height of a commercial aircraft flight.

However, the size of the balloon and strength of the pipe required are serious engineering challenges.

“Even manufacturing a hose 1 km in length is a challenge, but we are talking about a hose stronger than any built before,” said Chris Walton, SPICE project trials advisor.

Some countries are exploring geo-engineering solutions as a way to control climate change by cutting the amount of sunlight hitting the earth or by capturing greenhouse gases.

Potential schemes include using artificial trees to soak up carbon dioxide, using mirrors in space to cut the amount of sunlight reaching the earth or capturing CO2 from power stations and burying it under ground.

Supporters say such solutions could be a relatively fast way to control the climate if there was an abrupt change, such as the sudden loss of Arctic ice.

Detractors say the impact of mimicking or manipulating nature on a large scale is not yet fully known and such projects might deflect resources and attention from proven technologies.

Most of these solutions are still far from being established at large scale.

“With strong government support and in an emergency situation…the fastest we could deploy this system is two decades,” Watson told Reuters, adding that a minimum 10 to 20 balloons globally would be needed to reduce atmospheric temperature by 2 degrees.”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/09/14/fake-volcano-can-solve-climate-problems-scientists-say/#ixzz1Y4nveLaz

Comment:   I wonder if any of these brain pressed people playing firecrackers and Obamanomics understand that the greater the square mileage of Earth’s surface in temperate climes, fewer human folks would perish.

But the $$$$ to do Lefty research comes from the United Nations and American/British Lefty zealots thirsting for money and recognition.   Their  mission is to freeze the Earth and its peoples. ….for fame and friendship in the coming Marxist realms of forced equality…

We, in the American Northland enjoy immensely this past few decades of a warmer horticultural zone and wish to reach a reliable Horticultural Zone 5.   There was hope supported by statistics until 5 or 6 years ago that this Zone 5 heaven was just around the corner.

What should the punishment be for those psycho Climate Change freaks who  upon playing games with the Earth’s breathing and comfort space, ice-box Minneapolis  and Moscow beyond human endurance?  

Certainly a significant payback  should be in order!

Boehner Economic-Jobs Plan: Tax Increases are Off the Table

Boehner slams Obama jobs plan as ‘poor substitute’ for growth, calls for tax reform

by Russell Berman   at   the Hill

“House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) criticized President Obama’s jobs plan in an economic address in Washington on Thursday, calling it “a poor substitute for the pro-growth policies that are needed to remove barriers to job creation in America.”

In a speech to the Economic Club of Washington, Boehner outlined the Republican plan for job creation and urged the deficit-reduction supercommittee to lay the groundwork for an overhaul of the tax code. At the same time, he restated the GOP’s long-held opposition to tax increases to bring down the deficit, saying they are “off the table” and not “a viable option” for the supercommittee.

Boehner indirectly criticized the tax proposals in Obama’s jobs plan, saying they would only make the tax code “more complex” at a time when both parties want to simplify the system.

“It strikes me as odd that at a time when it’s clear that the tax code needs to be fundamentally reformed, the first instinct out of Washington is to come up with a host of new tax credits that make the tax code more complex,” Boehner said. “It’s probably not realistic to think the Joint Committee could rewrite the tax code by November 23.  But it can certainly lay the groundwork by then for tax reform in the future that will enhance economic growth and enhance the environment for economic growth.”

“The committee can develop principles for broad-based tax reform that will lower rates for individuals and corporations while closing deductions, credits, and special carve-outs in our tax code,” Boehner said.

RELATED ARTICLE

Boehner’s jobs speech

While opposing tax increases – including allowing the George W. Bush-era tax cuts to expire – he voiced support for closing tax loopholes, which could include tax breaks for oil and gas companies that Democrats have been clamoring to scrap for years.

Boehner couched his address in bipartisan rhetoric and said some of Obama’s proposals, which he didn’t specify, offered “opportunities for common ground.” But his speech is likely to significantly dim expectations for passage of many elements of the president’s plan. In pushing for comprehensive tax reform, Boehner criticized the kind of temporary tax credits that are central to Obama’s proposal.

Obama is proposing a combination of infrastructure spending, temporary tax cuts for businesses and individuals, free trade agreements and an extension of unemployment insurance as a way of boosting job growth, which slowed to a halt in August.

Acknowledging the economy had stalled, Boehner declared job creators across the country to be “basically on strike” and placed the blame for the nation’s economic woes squarely on Washington and the policies of the Obama administration.

“The problem is not confusion about the policies, … the problem is the policies,” Boehner said. “The anger many Americans have been feeling in recent years is beginning to turn into fear … fear of our future.”

“What we need to do is to liberate our economy from the shackles of Washington. Let our economy grow!” Boehner said. “The instinct in government, always, is to get bigger, more intrusive, more meddlesome.  And that instinct is at direct odds with the things that make the American economy move.”

The Speaker cited excessive regulation, higher taxes and too much spending as a “triple threat” to job creation. He spoke at length about rolling back regulations, which is the cornerstone of the House GOP’s fall agenda. Boehner referenced the recent federal raid of the Gibson Guitar factories in Tennessee and touted the House passage on Thursday of a bill aimed at blocking a move by the National Labor Relations Board to prevent Boeing from relocating a plant to South Carolina.

Boehner urged Obama to call a Cabinet meeting and direct his secretaries to report to him on policies that are inhibiting job growth.

“The members of the president’s Cabinet are not doing their jobs if they aren’t constantly focused on removing impediments to job growth,” he said, drawing a rare round of applause from a lunchtime audience that listened quietly to most of his speech. “If they’re not focused on that, they should be fired.”

While acknowledging skepticism across Washington about the deficit supercommittee, Boehner said he was “optimistic” it could succeed in its charge of finding $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction. He did not say whether he agreed with lawmakers and outside groups who are calling on the panel to expand its mandate, and he said it was too soon to say whether the committee would be involved in finding offsetting cuts to pay for a jobs bill, as Obama has proposed.

On taxes, Boehner stuck to his insistence that aside from closing loopholes, they should not be increased.

“Tax increases I think are off the table and I don’t think l they are a viable option for the Joint Committee,” he said. “It’s a very simple equation. Tax increases destroy jobs.  And the Joint Committee is a jobs committee. Its mission is to reduce the deficit that is threatening job creation in our country.”

Democrats quickly criticized his speech, which lasted just longer than 20 minutes.

“Speaker John Boehner and House Republicans think the answer to our economic challenges is more of the same failed policies to protect the ultra wealthy at the expense of the middle class,” said Rep. Steve Israel (N.Y.), chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “Speaker Boehner and House Republicans refuse to make billionaires and Big Oil pay their fair share so we can help small businesses create real middle-class jobs.” 

Source:
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/181793-boehner-criticizes-obama-jobs-plan-as-poor-substitute-for-pro-growth-policies

 

 

Today’s News from San Francisco……and What makes San Franciscans San Franciscans?

San Francisco is Pelosi Village, as you already know.   Nancy herself came from Baltimore where her father was Mayor.   She married into wealth and business with the DelMonte folks.  Keep that in mind when you go shopping for canned goods.

Our man nearby in California  is Prager fan, California Cole, who keeps us notified from time to time of the Lefty heat waves in the city which boasts Nancy Pelosi and Twinkie sweets.  

 Americans  should  know how San Franciscans become who they are……Use your imagination in defining who they are.  

Cole sent us the following San Francisco ‘news’ report regarding American women in politics today written by Brock Keeling at the News:

Two Noted Politicians In The Bay Area Today

Avowed racist and all-around liar Michele Bachmann is currently hosting a breakfast fundraiser in San Rafael this morning. Costing $1,000 plate, the fundraiser will help go to her deplorable and increasingly hysterical presidential campaign. Bachmann, along with many of her fellow Tea Party wonk celebrities, has made a name for herself over the last few months for being a hateful human being. More or less. She most recently linked the HPV vaccine to mental retardation during Monday’s GOP debate.

Meanwhile, in San Francisco, Secretary of State and former First Lady Hillary Clinton will make an appearance at the Westin St. Francis today. Clinton will deliver a keynote speech about “on the inclusion of women as an economic growth strategy” at the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Women and the Economy Summit.

Dem Senator Schumer Claims Parts of New York are too Jewish for Democrats….

Chuck Schumer: NY-9 is just too darn Jewish for

Democrats now

 

 by Jazz Shaw  at HotAir

(Introductory comment……I love America…….without loonies like Charlie Schumer and so many lefty lights like him, who might mean well but cost, cost, cost us dearly, the country   might become a dull boy.   Do review how the Left is explaining away the  election of Republican Bob Turner to represent the 9th Congressional District of New York…..a community heavily populated by Jewish Americans who elected Anthony Weiner  their man in 2010 in a landslide.   If I were Representative Turner, I would spend nearly all of my home time educating the community to the riches of conservatism.  ghr)

Jazz Shaw writes:

“Earlier today, Ed Morrissey pointed out what could have been a record breaking attempt at spinning a loss in New York’s 9th congressional district by DNC chair Debby Wasserman Schultz. It was an heroic effort, I’ll admit, and one for the ages. But never to be outdone, former holder of the 9th district seat and current Empire State Senator Chuck Schumer may have managed to top her.

Why did the Democrats lose this race in a part of town where they hold a 3-1 registration advantage? Well, at least in part, because the district has just become too darned Jewish.

After canceling his own conference call (on getting federal disaster aid for flood-ravaged NY farmers), Sen. Chuck Schumer teamed up with DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz to push back against the GOP spin that Congressman-elect Bob Turner’s upset win in NY-9 spells bad news at the national level for Democrats, and President Obama in particular.

Schumer, who represented NY-9 for 18 years, insisted the district is about 75 percent the same today, geographically speaking, as it was when he was in office, but drastically different when it comes to demographics. There are more Orthodox Jews, he said, and also more immigrants, making the district skew even more conservative than it had been back in his day…

Wasserman-Schultz, a Florida Jew, also predicted Obama – and the Democrats in general – “have consistently received the Jewish vote and will again” due to the president’s “strong record” on Israel and other issues Jewish voters care about.

Apparently, she hasn’t spoken with former NYC Mayor Ed Koch lately.

I understand full well, having done this for a while, that trying to map out why voters do what they do is often fairly close to reading a Rorschach test. But in this case, I have some direct experience in the subject matter. In the 2010 cycle I helped run the campaign for a conservative, pro-life, pro-Israel Republican in New York’s 22nd district. (And yes, I understand full well the demographic differences between upstate and the Brooklyn – Queens area.) We also received the endorsement of former Mayor Ed Koch on the basis of the Democrat’s anti-Israel policies. Want to know how much of a difference it made?

We still lost the New York Jewish vote massively. It just didn’t turn that many people around from that community.

Yes, there are many immigrants in NY-9. And yes, they have a disproportionately larger Jewish population than many other parts of the nation. (Anywhere from 25% to 40% depending on which pollster you ask.) But they have traditionally been, and continue to be, fairly reliable Democratic voters because of a complex tableau of competing issues. For Schumer and Wasserman-Schultz (also a Jew) to try to spin this as some sort of negative for their candidate, and then turn around and predict that these same “turncoat Jews” will still back Obama next fall is…

I’m sorry. My dictionary just broke down. I’ll get back to you later.”

Further comment:   Well in my day there was often a suggestion that there were good Jews and bad ones is some circles despite the political correctness of the day that no one should talk ill of others……and ‘bad ones’ usually suggested something ’other’ than  good, but there were no examples   mentioned.    

I confess that I did hear this division from my Dad from time to time.   He was a pharmacist and active in Masonry where in both cases he had close associates who were Jewish.   “Good guys” he would boast.   It’s the ones whom he didn’t know who were left to be  the bad ones…..but that was pretty much a guess because the idea always died there.

I wonder how the Brooklyn and Queens Jews will be getting along neighbors  following  this division in politics.   Will there be any talk about good Jews versus bad ones……?

Many of my own  Jewish friends and acquaintances including close clients ,  are in the conservative crowd.    Most have joked painfully about the assumptions their Lefty majority brethren make about the universality of higher Jewish morality arising from voting Democrat.   The baddest of the bad would be a Jewish conservative, I have been told…..frequently with annecdotes to boot.

Punishment for discovering a conservative  among the lefty children of King David is shunning……often a life sentence.

Good Man, Paul Ryan, Speaks about Tax Reform……Truthfully and Clearly

Paul Ryan threatens no one, does not lie, nor does he throw his grandmother under the bus when he talks in front of cameras.

Paul Ryan is an American from the midWest.   He speaks in clear, American tones about issues of government which need solving…….such as national bankruptcy, a deep economic depression, tax discrepancies and  budget imbalances…..and you all know the direction of the imbalances……..shifting fortunes to the pockets of politicians who want to bring Marxism to America, based on class and racial divisions and hatreds for the purpose of grabbing power to rule the Marxist way.

Listen carefully to Paul Ryan’s suggestions for America’s economic future:    Click on below:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/09/14/rep_ryan_three_steps_to_pro-growth_tax_reform.html

Obama Administration Exposed to Big Time Fraud in Solyndra Collapse

“Democrats are blame-shifting again”

by  Andrew Restuccia  at   the Hill

“Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee blasted top executives at the now-bankrupt California solar manufacturer Solyndra Wednesday, suggesting they misled federal officials about the financial standing of the company.

The effort to shift blame to Solyndra, which went bankrupt in August after the Obama administration in 2009 approved a $535 million stimulus loan guarantee for the company to build a solar manufacturing facility, comes as Republicans have sought to pummel the White House on the issue.

Rep. Dianne DeGette (D-Colo.), the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce’s oversight panel, said top Solyndra executives painted a rosy picture of the company’s financial outlook during a meeting with lawmakers in July.

“We also need to ask whether Solyndra misled federal officials,” Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee said.

 Of course, these Democrats are trying smoke and mirrors to distract voters from the man responsible for this half a billion dollar scandal.

Do they not read the Washington Post (and other media outlets for that matter)? If they had bothered to gather any facts they would have learned that the Obama administration had been repeatedly warned by professionals both inside and outside the government that Solyndra’s corporate icon should have been the skull and crossbones.

Joe Stephens and Carol Leonnig at the Washington Post have done a superb job uncovering the scandal. In an article regarding White House monitoring and pressuring of the Department of Energy to make a quick decision on the loan the reporters write:

The e-mails also raise questions about whether the administration should have foreseen financial trouble. In August 2009, e-mail exchanges between Energy Department staff members pointed out that a credit-rating agency predicted that the project would run out of cash in September 2011. Solyndra shut its doors on the final day of August.

Questions about the selection process were first raised in a July 2010 audit by the Government Accountability Office. It concluded that the Energy Department “lacked appropriate tools for assessing the progress” of the loan program and that the department treated applicants inconsistently, “favoring some applicants and disadvantaging others.”

Outside experts and professionals also warned that Solyndra was doomed. The company’s own auditors issued a “going concern” letter that indicated there were grave doubts regarding the viability of the company.

All of these warnings were ignored by the Obama team who continually pressured employees in the government to grant the loan guarantee to a company on its last legs — but also a company that had as its major investor a foundation started by a major Obama bundler and frequent White House visitor (George Kaiser).  He is an oil billionaire, but that did not prevent Obama from welcoming him and his wallet to the White House.

This is just shameful on the part of Democrats. Is Congresswoman Degette so foolish and naïve that she would trust Solyndra executives when they came to her office?  Why didn’t she ask for audited financial statements?  Does she just rely on the word of people with a vested financial interest in scheming to get taxpayer money?  Furthermore, their own newspaper has been reporting that the Obama team had plenty of evidence that Solyndra was going down the tubes.  Yet, they try to distract us by placing the blame solely on Solyndra executives.  Thus Obama’s Department of Justice sends the FBI in to carry out a very visible raid on Solyndra offices in order to encourage the view that a massive fraud had taken place.  Perhaps so — but if this were true many people saw reasons to reject this loan guarantee. Everyone except officials in the White House.

In other words, they are trying to shield him from charges that he is an incompetent. But more importantly, as Michael Barone points out , this scandal strikes at the heart of Obama’s personal popularity, Up until now the media has looked away at donor-linked pay for play politics. People have viewed Obama as personally removed from tainted deals. This will be much harder to do as the full Solyndra story plays out for the public.

Hence, we can expect a full-court press to absolve Obama of responsibility and pin the blame on the usual villains: executives, inadequate subsidies compared to Chinese companies, and the old reliable:  George Bush.”

The above article was found at the American Thinker  at Ed Lasky’s space.