I would love to see the House impeach Steven Chu. It would be interesting to see what the Senate would do, given how many vulnerable Democrats are up for reelection next year.
5 thoughts on “Accountability”
Comments are closed.
I would love to see the House impeach Steven Chu. It would be interesting to see what the Senate would do, given how many vulnerable Democrats are up for reelection next year.
Comments are closed.
The Senate wouldn’t do a thing. They’d fear any effort, which suggests funneling money to cronies is illegal, as a future jail sentence for themselves. The fact that various policies were broken in this case matters very little to polticians.
It’s interesting how yet another Obama appointee appears to have been more interested in “shaking things up” and expediting their goals rather than obeying the law or prudent, respectful use of taxpayer funds.
As to impeachment, Congress pretty much has free reign on what it decides are “high crimes and misdemeanors”. But I have to say, I have trouble seeing what was illegal here. If no punishment exists for the supposed crime (aside from stern language), that seems a solid indication that the activity is not really a crime even when it should be.
What is illegal here is stated in the article (subordination of the loan) which would be illegal even if the language wasn’t even in the bill. Leland is correct as to the reason why they won’t do anything about it, but that’s precisely why we citizens should demand it. Too bad the OWS crowd are too moronic to take up a good cause. We lost rule of law a long time ago. It’s hard to see us continuing as a nation without it or how we can get it back. Only if the citizens demand it which they don’t seem inclined to do.
If Obama is to be believed, Chu told him that we would soon have a battery capable of powering a car at a gas mileage equivalent of 130 mpg. That statement is completely devoid of meaning – denotative OR connotative. It’s gibberish. If Chu really said that (and Obama didn’t hear him incorrectly, which is possible), then he’s a charlatan of the first rank. His Nobel appeared to be deserved, but no technically competent person could make a such a statement in an earnest attempt to convey meaning. It would have to be an effort at deception — and deception is the defining attribute of the renewable energy mafia.
One of the true idiocies of the Solyndra thing is that the whole selling point of Solyndra was childish inability to understand projected area.
Cylindrical solar cells use over 3 times the material and over the period of a day collect the exact same amount of direct sunlight as a flat solar panel with the same diameter (it’s just a reversed order of integration).
Someone must have mentioned this because one of Solyndra’s selling points was that it could use the roof of the building as an ad hoc concentrator (presumably people who purchased Solyndra products were told that they’d get wildly different performance based on their roofing material).
In any case, use 3 times the material and collect, maybe, 1.2 times the energy.
You’d think a Nobel laureate would notice.
Or not. Fermi was once asked to comment on what Nobel laureates had in common. He said he couldn’t think of a thing… not even intelligence.