“The Obama administration promised a green energy future. What it delivered, though, is a present filled with rancid politics, aching failure and tawdry scandal.”
Investor’s Business Daily editorializes,
… Going where few mainstream media outlets dare to tread because they don’t want to hurt the president’s re-election chances, the [Washington Post] actually took a realistic look at the White House’s $80 billion clean-technology program. It found that “as Solyndra tottered, officials discussed the political fallout from its troubles, the ‘optics’ in Washington and the impact that the company’s failure could have on” a second term for Obama…
While the Post took a hard line, it was not the first left-leaning newspaper to do so. The New York Times provided similar coverage in August, reporting that “the green economy is not proving to be the job-creation engine that many politicians envisioned.”
But all this came out in 2011. Let’s see how much these newspapers mention Solyndra and the green scandal when the 2012 campaign heats up.
Check out the WashPost’s prior assaults on Obama’s green subsidies:
- WashPost: Politics powered decisions on Solyndra
- WashPost: Obama $5 billion investment in EVs sputters
- WashPost: Stop subsidizing clean energy
- WashPost: Before Solyndra, a long history of failed government energy projects
- WashPost dumps on subsidized electric cars again
- Shocker: WashPost trashes green jobs
Don’t forget that in the original Greek, the fourth horseman was “green”. Though the word wouldn’t be coined for more the 1700 years later, the meaning was that Death was a zombie horseman.
This has no relevance to anything, I just found it amusing.