Epic fail juxtaposition o' the day

James Pethokoukis calls this item "The entire Obama presidency, in one anecdote."

One of my favorite moments from the new book The Escape Artists: How Obama’s Team Fumbled the Recovery:

Energy was a particular obsession of the president-elect’s, and therefore a particular source of frustration. Week after week, [White House economic adviser Christina] Romer would march in with an estimate of the jobs all the investments in clean energy would produce; week after week, Obama would send her back to check the numbers. “I don’t get it,” he’d say. “We make these large-scale investments in infrastructure. What do you mean, there are no jobs?” But the numbers rarely budged.

[Ed: gee, what a surprise!]

Now let’s fast forward to this past September:

A $38.6 billion loan guarantee program that the Obama administration promised would create or save 65,000 jobs has created just a few thousand jobs two years after it began, government records show. The program — designed to jump-start the nation’s clean technology industry by giving energy companies access to low-cost, government-backed loans — has directly created 3,545 new, permanent jobs after giving out almost half the allocated amount, according to Energy Department tallies.

So where are the new jobs coming from, at least the good-paying ones? From the industry Obama wants to replace as much as possible with “clean” energy: oil and gas.

Fast forward this week to President Obama's spastic, poll-driven reaction considered policy positions on, eh, energy.

To purportedly tame the progressive rise in gas prices, President Obama visited a North Carolina truck manufacturer on Wednesday to unveil a new $1 billion plan to advocate electric and alternative vehicles through consumer incentives and federal grants for states.

The "green" initiative, tagged the "National Community Deployment Challenge," provides a $10,000 tax credit — up from the current $7,500 incentive — to consumers purchasing "advanced cars and trucks." The grant program includes a "Race to the Top" contest that would award money to states with "model communities" that agree to fund infrastructure such as charging stations or natural gas corridors "where alternative fuel trucks can transport goods without using a drop of oil," according to the White House Press Fact Sheet.

Yes, that's right. He wants to funnel more money to his campaign contributors, bundlers, and other fat-cats and claim it's for "green jobs".

What's the definition of insanity again?

Every road is an on-ramp to fun with the startlingly new, surprisingly sexy Dodge Deflation™

The new Dodge Deflation appears to be the logical successor to the Buick Bureaucrat and the ultra-popular Chevy Volt.

Truck Dealers Association: EPA 'Grossly Underestimated' The Enormous Costs of Their Byzantine Regulations

Gee, this news comes as quite a surprise. And who needs freight hauled around by trucks, anyhow?

A report released yesterday by The National Automobile Dealers Association and American Truck Dealers questions the Environmental Protection Agency's cost analysis of 2004-2010 emissions control mandates. Data collected by ATD shows EPA's cost estimates were off by a factor of between two and five.

As a result, ATD says, last decade's emissions mandates resulted in substantially higher prices for commercial vehicles, which depressed vehicle sales and created massive disruptions in normal business cycles, as well as delaying the environmental benefits that the EPA originally sought.

"While EPA can mandate what truck and engine makers have to build, they can't dictate what customers will buy," said Dave Westcott, vice-chair of NADA... the study sounds a stern warning about EPA's cost projections on the upcoming fuel economy standards for heavy and light vehicles -- which extend out to the 2017 to 2025 timeframe...

The study notes that when the EPA implemented its 2004-2010 rules for heavy trucks, it failed to predict and account for what truck and engine manufacturers had to accomplish to comply with those rules, and how the market would react...

Everything this enormous federal leviathan touches turns to crap.

The EPA can't even figure out ahead of time how much damage their insane regulations will cause the private sector. So they continue anyhow, issuing reams of new rules in their unceasing efforts to de-industrialize America. To centrally manage the economy. To create a Utopian society that can't be and never was.

I can't wait until these geniuses run the entire health care system. It'll be kinda like the medical version of the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, only without the great customer service.

Funniest article I've seen in years: a mystified Washington Post wonders 'What's ailing the Chevy Volt?'

No, I'm serious.

What’s ailing the Chevy Volt?

On Friday, GM announced it was halting production of the Chevrolet Volt until April, so as to maintain “proper inventory levels.” Sales of the electric vehicle have been disappointing, with the company missing its target of 10,000 Volts sold last year. Why hasn’t the car caught on?

Might I venture a few answers?

• The Volt has an annoying habit of sometimes blowing up

• It's incredibly expensive

• It's a coal-powered car

• It's the result of central planning, as opposed to actual market demands

The whole focus on electric cars is, in my opinion, borderline insane. Battery technologies are decades away from real suitability in automobiles. And, even more concerning, the Obama administration is waging a war on America's electric generation, thanks to an out-of-control EPA:

• GenOn Energy just announced it will be shuttering eight power plants over the next couple of years, taking about 15% of its total generating capacity offline

• Two Chicago-area power plants are slated to close

• Three midwest power plants owned by FirstEnergy will be forced to close

And the list goes on and on and on. Obama's war to de-industrialize America continues apace.

Exclusive: Full Schematic of Chevy Volt

Hat tip: Whited Speulchre.

Photos: Just how the heck did this happen? [Papa B]

Papa B:

Have you ever slapped your forehead and asked yourself...
"Just how the heck did this happen?"





Gotcha!

GM: Only about 30 times worse than Solyndra

Say, how's that GM investment working out for taxpayers?

BailoutCost.com calculates to the second and to the penny how much we are in the hole on the Government Motors bailout.

Briefly: We own about 500 million GM shares. To break even, they need to be sold at $53 per. Right now they're trading at about $26.

Which loses us about $13 billion.

Remember, Solyndra lost us: $0.5 billion.

I'm not real good at math, but that seems like a lot more.

20-30 times more (again, depending on the share price whence we sell).

Besides abrogating bankruptcy law to hand the UAW an immense payoff, let's not forget the administration's skulduggery surrounding Dealergate and the hundreds of selective dealer closings that seemed curiously -- how you say in English? -- selective and partisan.

When the complete history of the Obama-Holder administration is finally written, I'm certain it will make Nixon and Mitchell look like the children who stole fizzy-lifting drinks from Willy Wonka's factory.

It's a crony capitalism trifecta! GE 'forcing' employees into Chevy Volts

At the confluence of General Electric (which paid no taxes on billions in income), General Motors (which still owes taxpayers $25 billion), and the Obama administration lies a nexus called "We Got Screwed":

General Motors and General Electric are two companies that have been in the political crosshairs lately. GM stands accused of “crony capitalism,” while GE is under fire for paying no Federal income taxes in 2010. The two companies share more than that though, with GE placing an order for 12,000 Chevy Volts and other hybrid vehicles.

A memo leaked to Green Car Reports lays out GE’s plans for their new fleet of Volts, and as expected, it has some people crying foul.

The memo, sent to employees of GE Healthcare Americas team explains that all sedan, crossover, and minivan purchases in 2012 will be replaced by the Chevy Volt. Only field engineers are excepted from having to drive a company Volt.

GE will offer estimates for installation Level 2 Charging Stations, though all-gas use will be allowed when there is no electric option. Any employees who opt out of the Volt program will not be compensated for their expenses. Those who do choose to drive the Volt will be reimbursed for public charging and home charging costs, in addition to gas uses.

...GE is positioning itself as a big player in the EV charging market. Getting employees into Volts also means getting charging stations into homes. ... It’s a bold move to be sure, and it will hopefully prove to be a boon to the Volt’s flagging sales numbers. GM had hopped to sell as many as 60,000 Volts in 2012, before dropping that number to 45,000. Will they even make that number though? Hard to tell, though GE’s business will go a long way towards giving the Volt some sales momentum.

It's getting to the point where General Electric and General Motors are indistinguishable from the federal government.

Anyone know how much it would cost to have one of these mounted on my hood?

I was thinking it would streamline my commute.


Related: The 10 Cars With the Most Obnoxious Drivers

Here are some photos you'll never see in legacy media: the Volt crash test that torched a whole series of cars

Odd. I must have missed this report on ABC, NBC, CBS and in The New York Slimes:

I attended Wednesday’s 8:00am (8am?!?) House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing entitled:

Volt Vehicle Fire: What Did NHTSA Know And When Did They Know It?

The witnesses [included] National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA), Barack Obama-appointee Administrator David Strickland... [and] General Motors (GM), Barack Obama-appointee CEO Dan Akerson.

...This hearing was all about a single June Volt blaze. The battery burst into flames about three weeks after a test crash at and by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA).

A fire about which Obama’s NHTSA did tell the Obama White House. But a fire about which neither Obama’s NHTSA, the Obama Administration nor Obama’s GM told the American people for nearly six months – and then did so only when forced by a looming Bloomberg news story.

...Joan Claybrook, a former administrator at NHTSA believes part of the reason for the delay was the “fragility of Volt sales.” Yet she also believes that “NHTSA could have put out a consumer alert, not to tell them [customers] for six months makes no sense to me.” ...For Obama, notifying Americans of their potential immolation-by-Volt is of less import than his keeping his gig past November.

The one NHTSA Volt fire discussed at the hearing was not the only NHTSA Volt fire that occurred. In November, there were two others. After conducting three different tests two weeks ago, the NHTSA found that the Volt’s battery either caught fire or began to smoke in two out of the three.

So that’s three Volt fires – all in the hands of the Obama Administration, all after crashes... There were [also] three other, private-owner Volt fires. None of which involved Volts that were in crashes.

...There was the Volt that in April burst into flames – twice. These were the fires that led to Obama’s NHTSA beginning its investigation. And then in November another Volt leapt into flames. While Obama’s NHTSA was still investigating – but after the NHTSA-Obama Administration-GM cover-up had come to light (get it?)...

...We still have no idea what caused these fires. The only thing we do know is that they were not caused by crashes – because these cars were never in crashes. So why did Obama’s NHTSA, the Obama Administration and Obama’s GM singularly focus on (but one of three) post-crash Volt fires ... [w]hen none of these three privately-owned combustible Volts had been in accidents?

We – still – don’t know. Anything.

But don’t worry: The Obama Administration has declared that the Obama-owned GM Chevy Volt is perfectly safe – just in time for Obama’s reelection campaign.

Indeed. The Volt is safe. We guarantee it. Who's we? Shut the hell up, peons.


Related: Exclusive Photo: First Chevy Volts arrive at local dealers


Photos: Charging Point.

The 10 Cars With the Most Obnoxious Drivers

Hey, but if you drive one of these, I'm sure you're the exception...

10. Toyota Prius
They should have called it the Toyota Sanctimonius. That sidelong glare you get when you pass one? It means you're driving too fast. Wasting precious gasoline. Defiling Gaia. Reveling in your carbon footprint. You, my friend, are the enemy of mankind. And all Prius drivers.

9. 1990's-Vintage Modified Honda Civic
Yes, this is the infamous "Ricer", equipped with fart pipe, sub-$250 body kit, partially-finished paint job and Formula One-style spoiler. It must, of course, be lowered sufficiently to scrape the pavement like a spatula. And its driver must try to race every single car on the road, including pickups towing cabin cruisers, ice cream trucks, and Soccer Moms in their Caravans.

8. Mercedes C-Class
Dude, it's a C-Class. The entry-level Mercedes. It's the Sentra of Mercedes. I know, you think everyone is jealous of you. Here's a helpful hint: they're not. In fact, all Mercedes owners look down on you for driving the brand's Corolla. And drivers of other makes just kinda feel sorry for you, because. Well, you're. Trying. Too. Hard.

7. Buick LeSabre
You're stuck behind a car that is signaling right, but won't move. You're following a car going 20 in a 35. You're shouting at the car in front of you, which refuses to turn right on red, despite the fact that there isn't another car in sight. You are behind a 2004 Buick LeSabre driven by a person old enough to have known Ulysses S. Grant.

6. BMW 3-class
It would seem that every single, self-absorbed, 20-something male college graduate with a steady job feels like the world owes him a BMW 3-series. And, with said purchase comes the requisite disregard for traffic signals, lane-changing courtesies, and any semblance of manners. Should you pass one, even accidentally, you will find yourself the subject of a street race that will often end up with the BMW screeching ahead of you, only to narrowly avoid rear-ending a panel truck at the next red light.

5. Range Rover
We know, lady: you've got to get Tyler and Madison to lacrosse practice and you've got a pressing nail appointment. But, please, could you stay the hell off the phone while you weave from side to side?

4. Subaru Outback
Hey, hippie: it's not the sixties. You're not driving an air-cooled VW. You're allowed to go over 20 miles-an-hour. Even with all of the stupid bumper stickers weighing you down. Promise. We know: you love the environment and you value safety -- but you can't afford a Volvo. Hey, we get it. Believe me, we get it.

3. Chevy Volt
If driving a $45,000 coal-powered car that has a tendency to catch on fire is considered sexy and environmentally conscious, count me in!

2. Mini Cooper
Hey kid, I know it's made by BMW, but it's not really a BMW. Really. And you're not in The Italian Job. Really. You're in an overpriced s***-box modeled loosely after one of the worst cars of all time.

1. Any vehicle with an Obama bumpersticker on it.
No matter how evil a glare you throw at one of these drones, they keep their gaze fixed straight into the distance. Leaning forward, as it were. It's almost as if they're mesmerized by the visions of a Utopian society, that which never was and never could be. It's true; they're exceedingly stupid. They believe in the mirage of Statism; the bill of goods sold to them by the Charlatan-In-Chief that translates not to a Utopia, but to a Dystopian nightmare, the endgame for all collectivist societies. In a sane society, these people would be required to read Ameritopia before receiving a driver's license.

Exclusive Photo: Prepping Your Garage For a Chevy Volt

If asbestos is still legal, I recommend plenty of it.

Electric cars might save you money at the pump, but they sure don’t save you time filling up. A typical electric car... takes upwards of 20 hours to recharge a fully drained battery when using an standard 120-volt outlet. While this might not be a problem for those looking to buy a second car for occasional outings, it certainly won’t cut it if an electric car is meant to be your primary vehicle.

In order to achieve a quicker charge, you’ll need to hire an electrician to install a 240-volt, 40-amp line that connects directly to the circuit breaker, a hookup similar to the one you might have for an electric oven or clothes dryer. With the increase in voltage, you can cut your charging time down to seven hours for a Nissan LEAF and four hours for the Chevy Volt, which means an overnight charge makes it a more practical purchase for daily use.

Super-fast charging stations capable of pumping out 480 volts are already on the market, and can recharge a car in 30 minutes or less. But these souped-up charging stations are currently for commercial use only because most homes can’t handle the kind of voltage and amperage required, at least not without some major rewiring of the power grid.

In related news, the federal government has decided to close its investigation of Volt fires.

The U.S. government on Friday closed its investigation of Chevy Volt battery fires, concluding that there is no apparent defect trend and that electric vehicles generally do not pose a greater risk of fire than gasoline-powered vehicles.

Of course not. All of those modifications GM had to make were just for show.

There's nothing to be concerned about. Just go about your business.

Exclusive Photo: Security Cam Captures L.A. Arson Suspect

Biff Spackle emails us this photo acquired from an unnamed source in Hollywood.

Hey, is that a Chevy Volt?

Seriously, police now have one person in custody related to the recent arson spree.

Exclusive Photo: First Chevy Volts arrive at local dealers

Truth be told, this isn't the real photograph that accompanied the news story. It's just one I found online. But, c'mon, you could easily imagine this happening:

Car described as a fuel saver, but also a little pricey (Ed: and sometimes quite warm)...

...The Edmunds.com Web site called the 2012 Chevy Volt "arguably the most fuel-efficient car on the market, but it's pricey for what you get."

Contrary to what its name suggests, the Volt is far from an all-electric vehicle. It is powered by a 149 horsepower electric motor that relies on a lithium-ion battery pack until the battery charge nears depletion. A four-cylinder internal combustion engine then kicks in and replaces the battery pack in generating power for the electric motor. A fully charged Volt can travel about 35 miles before it begins using gasoline at a rate of about 40 miles per gallon, according to the EPA.

The battery can be recharged in about four or eight hours, depending on whether it is plugged into a 120-volt or 240-volt charging outlet.

The cars available at dealerships in the area sell for $39,000 to $44,000, but a $7,500 federal tax credit cuts the buyer's cost to the low- to mid-$30,000 range.

The Volt's introduction to the region has been accompanied by a wave of news stories reporting an investigation by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration into potential fire hazards linked to the Volt's battery pack. The agency reported two fires and an incident of smoke and sparks stemming from safety tests conducted by regulators this year... The agency added that Volt owners who have not been in a serious crash "do not have reason for concern."

And since each Volt appears to cost American taxpayers roughly $250,000 apiece in various subsidies to GM, a buyer is truly getting a heck of a deal for that $40,000.

Saad: Saab is dead

The quirky Swedish automaker is calling it quits after suffering through the last two fitful decades.

The past two years have been rough for Saab. Since its independence from General Motors in 2010, the quirky Swedish brand has been beleaguered with financial woes, production stops, and an ever-shrinking customer base for its products...

[Despite numerous attempts to resurrect it] there is little chance left for Saab. The board of Saab's parent company -- Swedish Automobile, formally know as Spyker -- has decided that the best solution at this point is to file for bankruptcy and liquidate what is left of the company's asset...

Saab was one of the first automakers to turbocharge its engines. It did so because of its aviation heritage; turbocharging a radial engine was a surefire way to derive more horsepower for a prop.

But after its acquisition by GM, things really started to go south.

Under GM's direction, the badge-engineered Saab 9-2X (based on the Subaru Impreza) and Saab 9-7X (based on the Chevrolet Trailblazer) were introduced in the American market in 2005 with the hope of increase sales. Both models were a critical and commercial failure and were scrapped a few years after production.

Gee, I wonder why.

A Saab Impreza and a Saab Tahoe? Marketing genius.

R.I.P, Saab. I once owned a 1985 Saab 900 Turbo (with the ignition on the floor between the two front bucket seats). It was a great, great car with dozens of unique features that were eviscerated by the bean-counters in Michigan.

We'll miss you.


Image credit: Saab Network.