UPDATED: link below
Chris Horner, author of the recently released book, Power Grab: How Obama’s Green Policies Will Steal Your Freedom And Bankrupt America, revealed that a major ethics scandal involving someone in the Obama administration will be unveiled on Monday. Here is the complete quote that comes at the 29:01 mark of the interview on a Saturday Radio program (link follows)
“You’re going to see the first ethics scandal in the Obama administration. We’ve got our hands on some internal
documents revealing a serious conflict of interest at a very high level on these green jobs and stimulus and the
policies that Carol Browner was talking about. It isn’t Ms. Browner, but it is someone tied to Al Gore.”
The source of this information is Mark Gillar’s radio program, here
Chris Horner advises that a story will appear Monday morning, and that he has documentation of the issue. When available, a summary and link will appear at WUWT.
===============================
Here it is:
Christopher Horner, April 26, 2010:
More Global Warming Profiteering by Obama Energy Official
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“Gore has set the tone for this administration: hypocritical, hedonistic hyperbole”
Is this the same hypocrisy that holds Reagan to be a small-government hero despite his massive military buildup and high levels of taxation, Reagan and Bush as decent men despite selling arms to enemies (and getting off scott-free) and the same hypocrisy who poo-poohed the Vice-President being in charge of a war he was profiting for, yet makes an extramarital affair by a Democrat something we spend Federal dollars investigating and prosecuting?
For the record, though, I’m not a big Obama fan and I think the Rezko thing will blow up in his face, but what’s with us here in the United States excusing Republican Presidents and Vice-Presidents for selling us out to our enemies for a profit, but jumping all over every minor thing everyone else does? (I was going to say ‘Democrats’ but people made Larry Craig’s private sex life a big deal too.)
My opinions are pretty unpopular, though. I tend to think of demanding that historically low tax rates (lower than the golden Reagan years) during a time of crushing debt and two major wars to be borderline treason, and we all know how the U.S. Constitution defines treason, and what the punishment of that offense is.
davidmhoffer (12:13:35) :
“Does this administration really believe that they can impose government regulated maximum power use to the average consumer?”
Yes, I think thats what they want. World wide.
Governed by the UN.
This story is as likely to get play in the MSM as a Yoko Ono song on the radio!
So how long will it be before the stuff starts to finally stick to all the silicon valley solar energy startups; who are getting megabucks in taxpayer guaranteed loans and other perks; that are hardly warranted if free clean green renewable energy is for real.
I recently read a not very informative San Jose Murky News Business section article about SunPower solar energy and their PV panels.
According to the article, Sunpower has the highest commercially available energy efficiency of anyone in the business; and are selling systems with a minimum of 22% efficiency. I have soem “data sheets” on some SunPower panels; and they are not very informative. It used to be that you could get more detailed technical specifications on a 25 cent plastic packaged transistor; than you can get on these solar panels.
BUT !! I hasten to add, that I believe that SunPower is one of the good guys.
TJ Rodgers the CEO of Cyprus Semiconductor, is on the board of Sunpower, and Cypress is a major player and owner of SunPower.
If I am not mistaken, I once had breakfast with TJ Rodgers at some convention; either Electrochem Society; or more likely the Electron Devices Conference; at ehich he presented (if my memory hasn’t failed me) an important paper of Vee-Groove MOS; of which hew was most likely the original inventor. Don’t remeber how it eventually panned out but even at that early stage of his career, he struck me as a very smart chap; and he has done very well for himslef and a lot of others with Cypress, and Now Sunpower.
Some other solar companies I am not as impressed with. One company dposits thin films of silicon (i presume) inside glass tubes; and then lays the glass tubes out in a row. They claim that the tubular structure accepts sunlight from all directions so it detects diffuse solar energy as well as beam energy.
Well Duh !! the projected area is the same however you slice it; and their installations all seem to place the tubular arrays horizontally on the roof; rahtet than steer them to point at the sun. Well of course that si their fclaim to fame; the tubular structure makes orientation unnecessary.
This was one area where the SJMN article printed some really important information.
Solar energy is AREA CONSTRAINED.
So efficiency is the name of the game; not panel cost.
You can maybe get 5% efficiency; from cells that you spray on with a spray gun; for about the cost of painting your house. Well so oyu need four times as much roof are to get Sunpower’s energy collection; so now try and tell me you are competitive.
I don’t know how these businesses are going to pan out; but if it was me; I would put my money on the efficiency leader; whoever that turns out to be.
It is unfortunate, that a significant part of the solar spectrum that silicon is specially sensitive to, also happens to be absorbed by water vapor in the atmosphere, in the 760-900 nm red-near IR region.
Good luck on being able to afford Gallium Nitride or Gallium Indium Nitride solar cells, in the near future to get further up the band gap range where most oif the soalr energy is.
Well NASA can afford it; but the home owner likely can’t. The total integrated R&D dolalrs spent on Silicon Technology pretty muc wipes almost any competing technology off the commercial viability map.
Some tried it with GaAS technology and high concentration solar concentrator systems. Maybe that could make a return some day; who knows.
At some point in the not too distant future, there will be an accounting. The 2nd Amendment has not yet been repealed.
Brad (09:38:51) :
The only people picking this story up are the right wing fruitcake sites at this point. Either there is nothing real here and it is just more rightie spin, or someone needs to find a real smoking gun.
—————–
Reply: Really… the only ones. The Lame Stream Media is just as forthcoming with this news as they were critical of Obama during the campaign, which is to say Not At All. Vigilance is not their strong point since they’re happy with the current situation.
Obama is the quintessential “anti-parallel politician”, meaning he was talking one direction during the campaign and is now going in the completely opposite direction as an elected official. But as others have stated above, it is practically impossible to find unethical behavior in a group with no ethics, for they make their own rules and call everybody “racists” that make such allegations. Are you point man for Obama?
Johnny D (09:06:06) :
Doesn’t look very compelling to me at the moment either, but gee, Johnny D, I guess you would be delighted to accept Enron’s version of that unfortunate misunderstanding, too. Nothing to see, we’ve got it all covered….
Tool.
Obama isn’t the enemy here. He isn’t driving this issue as Gore has done. He is driven by it. This isn’t a defining issue for Obama. It is just something he has had to choose a position on like he has had to choose positions on all sorts of other things.
Every politician today has had to react in some way to the `climate change issue’ and come up with a `climate change policy’. Should we blame Obama for not being prescient enough to see the deception before climategate broke at the time he was formulating his position? Should we regard it as a negative that he has been (unlike Bush) at least willing to listen to scientists?
Imagine for a minute that the IPCC reports were unvarnished truth (hard I know – but try). Then Obama’s response was surely responsible. All the advice he was getting was unanimously telling him that the planet was in danger. Isn’t his response to that a reasonable one? He has been deceived as much as anyone here. I find the way he is being demonized rather distasteful.
Politicians find it hard to change positions once they have adopted them since their enemies will portray any change as weakness. Personally I think willingness to change is more like a strength, but that isn’t how the political culture works.
Obama is surely looking at the climate change issue. He must be considering whether to continue down the path he started out on or whether to choose some new policy. We should all recognise however that changing his position is not a trivial matter. He must be absolutely sure of his new ground if he switches, because the instant he changes he is going to come under sustained attack.
If Obama makes a change now has to know for certain that he will not need to change back in future. The only thing more fatal to a politician than being accused of weakness for switching position is being accused of weakness for `flip-flopping’. Do we have definitive scientific evidence that AGW is NOT happening? Nearly! Nearly – but not quite! At best we can show that the evidence supporting AGW is fatally flawed.
I can see why Obama has not yet altered course. Climategate has cast considerable doubt over the warmist claims, but as of yet there is no settled consensus to replace it. Obama is waiting for that consensus. He has now committed himself to a position which he can’t abandon without strong evidence; evidence that goes beyond mere doubt.
Obama isn’t alone. All politicians around the world are in the same boat. They have all committed themselves to a position on climate change that they cannot easily retreat from without paying a political cost. None of them so far have been willing to pay that political cost. They are all waiting for strong evidence which they can point to to say that AGW isn’t happening. Without that they can’t defend themselves if they are attacked for changing position.
What could Obama point to today to support a change in position. In the face of official stuff like IPCC reports, you expect him to point to some blogs? You expect him to stand up in public and reject the IPCC report and take the political risk of changing position on climate change on the basis of doubts cast by non-scientist bloggers? That would be an incredibly brave thing for him to do. He would immediately come under attack from within his own party, and the republicans who hate him so much will attack him for demonstrating weakness. He just can’t do that. Even Obama – who is a very good politician – couldn’t pull that off and get away with it unscathed.
What politicians like Obama need is evidence that the ‘scientific consensus’ has actually changed. And I think it is changing slowly. Yes scientific consensus is a stupid concept. From a scientist’s point of view only the truth matters and what other scientists think is irrelevant. But consensus is not a stupid concept from a political point of view. He needs something like an IPCC report that changes its mind and say “Oops – climate change may not be caused by CO_2 after all”. If the IPCC won’t do it (which I think is rather likely), he needs a report with equivalent scientific authority backing it to say the same thing.
Otherwise the best he can do is drag his feet on actually implementing his current climate change policy. That is probably the most he can get away with right now and all we should really expect of him.
“Brewing ethics scandal”? Somehow we picture a leder-hosen clad, walrus-mustached Braumeister peering into a foaming fermentation vat and saying, “Vergess that dead rat floating there. Der shipment muss go out on skedule!”
Brewing ethics are flexible, y’know.
susan parsons (06:27:21) :
This is what was expected from Barak Obama. Constitutional procedure means absolutely nothing to him. He thinks he is a Pharaoh or something. “We the People..” is not in his vocabulary. “The People” are what he says “made the mess”. and he seems to think it is up to him to set everything right. He seems to think he knows what is the best way for things to run. But the truth is he’s an empty suit.
The John Stossel show on Serious
Part 1
kwik (13:57:36) :
davidmhoffer (12:13:35) :
“Does this administration really believe that they can impose government regulated maximum power use to the average consumer?”
Yes, I think thats what they want. World wide.
Governed by the UN>>
Ah. Well I wish him good luck with that. The UN has been SO effective at peackeeping, nuclear non-proliferation, arms control, genocide prevention, resolving border disputes, administering programs like oil for food… I have NO doubt that they can pull this off. Wave an angry finger at Iran and warn them to stop enriching uranium… you can understand itz not the sort of thing they’re good at. But wave an angry finger at me and I’ll jump right up and shut my air conditioner off no problem, that’s what you do when the UN wags a finger at you about something REALLY important. You know those cheater boxes for satellite TV? Don’t suppose the geniuses who build them might go into the smart meter cheatin’ business?
The John Stossel show on Serious
Part 2
Pretty pathetic. Stossel treats us Americans like idiots. One window company got a tax credit? No. 8 did. The facts are out there. Stossel chooses not to report on the whole story for his own sensationalist value. And then it gets picked up by people who….don’t do their own searches on Google? From what I see, Serious is getting the attention it deserves. Their windows are going in the Empire State Building….hmmm…funded by the owner. Look into it yourself. I call it media company cronyism and sloppy, shabby, dumb reporting. I think we’re better than this, John.
http://blog.seriousmaterials.com/?p=1007
Johnny D (09:06:06) :
Yeah, quite right. They don’t receive money direct from DoE, just from the weatherisation program. I’m sure it didn’t help them that Obummer himself highlighted the company in his green jobs spiel.
As I recall, they are a double glazing company. Being in the trade, I can tell you that DG companies are much of a muchness. Guardian, an American glass manufacturer sell well here in the UK, being cheap.
Pilkington have recently released low iron glass which has high IR transmission. They have even more recently released coated low iron glass to reduce the IR transmission.
The theory is that the glass allows IR in but inhibits its release. However, they have recently been forced to admit that the coating inhibits IR in both directions
Now that’s a bit of a bummer.
DaveE.
About Pilks low iron glass.
What they neglect to say is that the sand has to be shipped from Spain to Hull, then transported to St. Helens on the other side of the country. Then, when processed it has to be heated to a significantly higher temperature than normal sand to make the glass.
DaveE.
Dr. Roy Spencer will be interviewed tonight (Mon.) on Coast-to-Coast from 10pm to 2am Pacific time.
RockyRoad-
LOL!
The lame stream media did such a good job of researching Bush obvious lies about Iraq? The lamestream media did such a good job of leaving Clinton alone over Whitewater? The lamestream media is just lame, they are not right or left, those that think they are have a myopic view that does not allow any thought from the other side to enter their brains…
Personally, I think global warming is bunk, but we need healthcare reform, because I think for myself and do not follow in lockstep behind anyone.
Come on guys, this kind of stuff has been going on forever. Remember the company called Halliburton and all the ties the Bush administration had to it? Sadly cronyism is commonplace.
Of course it doesn’t make it right, but to act like it’s the first time something like this has ever happened in Washing is either disingenuous or just dumb.
“”” Andy Y says:
April 27, 2010 at 6:27 am
Come on guys, this kind of stuff has been going on forever. Remember the company called Halliburton and all the ties the Bush administration had to it? Sadly cronyism is commonplace. “””
So Andy; tell us all about Haliburton. What business sector are they in; and can you give us a short list of say their top ten competitors in THAT business sector.
I hear a lot of people complaining about “Haliburton”; not a lot of descrition of just what their business is. So why don’t you inform us Andy.
**************
Andy Y says:
April 27, 2010 at 6:27 am
Come on guys, this kind of stuff has been going on forever. Remember the company called Halliburton and all the ties the Bush administration had to it? Sadly cronyism is commonplace.
Of course it doesn’t make it right, but to act like it’s the first time something like this has ever happened in Washing is either disingenuous or just dumb.
***************
Dick Cheney was not in a position to profit from Haliburton getting Iraq contracts. All his stock and options were placed in a charitable trust before he took office. This woman stands to make a profit if she makes certain decisions in her job. Does this seem right to you, Andy? Or is anything Obama and the DemocRATs do OK with you?