[ClearCase_guy]

Okay, I admit I don't quite follow this sort of twisted thing.
And I have no doubt that Obama put some "funny" agreement in place at the time of the loan.

But I remember the GM bankruptcy. Did the bond holders get the money they were entitled to? No. They got screwed so that the government could get a better deal.
I don't like Solyndra at all, but there seems to be a deal in place. Is the government going to ignore the agreement, screw the intended beneficiaries and try to finagle a sweet deal for the gov't?

This is why businesses won't take risks or hire people. Whatever they do, there is a real danger that the feds will come along and wipe the slate clean and say "Here's the deal that allows me to makeout real well, and you not so much."

[MrB]

At GM, the stockholders got screwed in favor of the gov’t.

At Solyndra, the taxpayer got screwed in favor of private investors who happen to be 0bama cronies.

[RC2]

I don’t believe it’s a deal for the government. I believe it’s a deal for the big donor of the Obama re-election. If this guy didn’t get his money back, he, most likely, wouldn’t donate to Obama. Simple as that.

[wideawake]

The Louisiana Teacher's Fund decided to invest in subordinated securities while Bennett decided to pay more for more senior ones. The pension fund manager made a bad decision and Bennett a good one.

The taxpayer did not sign on for a deal where the terms of the financing were changed to privilege the investment of a major campaign donor.