Newt

So on November 9th, 2011 another Republican debate occurred in Michigan.  This time, though, the moderator was not Anderson Cooper.  There were three different moderators, each of which the names escape me.  Surprisingly, I caught this one on television, although it was a total accident.  I went to type in a channel, my fingers punched the wrong numbers, and the debate popped onscreen just as it was starting.  How weird is that?

The environment at this debate was not combative as the last one was.  The last one was full of chaos.  This time the folks onstage almost seemed like a team, like they were bonded together.  It was impressive.  I have taken a closer look at a couple of candidates, but Newt Gingrich struck me as intolerant last night.

He scoffed at the moderators more than once, to the point where one of them was very irritated.  For some reason, though, I really like that about Mr. Gingrich.  He had kind of a "screw off" attitude, and he played by his own rules.  I like that, too.  Sometimes to pull yourself out of a really deep hole, a person has to change the rules for a while.

Check this out:

HeeHee!  Here it is!  Boy, she gets really annoyed as he play childishly coy with her!

Hmm.  Here is some more juice on Gingrich's attitude, as I mentioned earlier, as reported and analyzed by The Washington Post.  Funny, the comment I just made about my liking his haughtiness towards the moderators is outlined in the Post article.  Very interesting.

This link will provide you with much detail about Newt's performance from November 9, 2011.  If nothing else, I really encourage you to watch the video listed on the page, even if it is just to hear the first minute of the video.  Newt is an impressive speaker.  And he knows what he is talking about!  He can make any of us think about the problems that are happening right now.  It is not that he is necessarily right in everything he says, his comments just make a person think.

Solyndra

I just happened to be listening to the radio the day that the conspiracy was brought up regarding the Solyndra plant, which  is a plant that received a lot of money to produce solar panels in the United States for green energy and within about a year it had already failed. It has been rumored for weeks now that the plant was not going to work before it even opened its doors, and that  the money was approved for this particular company because Obama was supported financially by this ceo.  It is also rumored that the Japanese were making the same solar panels for much, much less than that was the main base for people knowing that the plant was going to fail.  even knowing that the plant was going to fail, it did open with a brand-new building and all brand-new machinery and today it is empty. Today it sits empty- as far as I can find, anyway.

On Thursday there  was a House energy and commerce committee panel and the Republicans voted to subpoena the White House communication documents regarding the situation.  Of course, the Democrats were very against this. Tthe White House did try to deter the moves of the subpoena but it was a no go.  Some folks stressed that the White House never been subpoenaed by this particular committee but the Republicans replied that their hope had been to avoid this step.  Of course some people are saying that the White House pushed out the stimulus money to help Obama supporters, or financiers.

And of course the Democrats have comments for the Republicans saying that they wish the Republicans would have as much enthusiasm for creating new jobs as they do with this particular investigation. 

Two of the first three companies that received loan guarantees through the stimulus have now filed for bankruptcy protection.  This is two months after someone drove filed for Chapter 11. Mr. Obama has egg on his face from this particular loan guarantee worth $535 million after he promoted the company as a way to create green energy jobs. I will be curious to see what the internal documents from the White House show us. Do you think these documents should in fact be subpoenaed or do you think that just as history has run its course, these documents should not be subpoenaed by this committee?  I will be curious to hear your thoughts.