I missed some of this, or ABCNews did. Some of this is semi-important context.

First up, Fisker says "only" $169 million went for the Fisker Karma, being built in Finland. "Only" $169 million went to designing this car (and, they say, designing the tools to build it).

The larger part of their loan is supposed to go towards building a more mass-market vehicle, the Nina, which they claim will be built in Delaware, just as Biden had hoped. Sometime in 2013.

Eh. I don't know why we should be spending $169 million to design a luxe gas-hybrid for the very rich.

As for the mass-market vehicle: I am doubtful about this. I don't know much about cars, but I know this: Mass market vehicles are the province of the big auto manufacturers, because they are engineered to the penny. To keep costs down, they attempt to save, seriously, a nickle, dime, or quarter here and there in the design.

That kind of expensive engineering is really only justified when you're going to make tens of thousands of units, and price -- even a couple of hundred dollars' difference -- is a driving consideration for buyers.

Small companies tend to produce more expensive, higher-end vehicles. Because they're going to have inefficiencies, and they're not going to be engineered to the penny, and so cars they produce can't really compete on a price basis.

I'm thinking of, like, the DeLorean. Which was a failure. But imagine if DeLorean tried to make a Ford Escort competitor. Forget it. He wouldn't even have tried.

Why are we, the taxpayer, spending money on Fisker's engineering when we have multiple big automakers already doing that sort of thing? And do we have any confidence that a start-up will be successful in this venture?

And why are we giving a subsidy to high-end cars in the first place? If, absent our loan guarantees, the Fisker Karma would have cost $200,000 per vehicle -- What do we care? Leonardo DiCaprio is not price sensitive, is he?

I don't think any of this is going to work. The big auto makers make these cars at a loss. They do it because they sort of have to -- PR crap -- and the losses are hidden among their multibillion-dollar general operating costs.

But a couple of start-ups making only these sorts of high-expense, low-actual-performance, eco-prestige cars? Where do the losses get hidden in the budget when there's nothing to the budget except the losses?

Oh right -- it gets hidden in the US government budget.

If the big automakers want (or feel they need to) piss millions away on these cars, fine. The American taxpayer should not be drafted into subsidizing someone else's car.

Thanks to AndyU.

Posted by: Ace at 10:40 AM | Comments (150)
Post contains 467 words, total size 3 kb.

"Solyndra on Wheels" is the designation given to this boondoggle by "Fantastical Andrew Fox."

I recalled reading that the Federal government had become a major financial partner in Fisker Automotive. That would explain the official rollout taking place in Washington. When I got back to my computer, I looked up the specifics. We the taxpayers are on the hook for more than half a billion dollars, about the same amount that got loaned to Solyndra, another “green manufacturer,” before they went bankrupt. At least Solyndra was manufacturing their products in this country, providing American manufacturing jobs (if short-lived jobs), and making a product that average Americans could conceivably afford. Fisker is manufacturing these gorgeous Leonardo DiCaprio toys in Finland. And the kicker, for those of you who would still claim that the risk of half a billion tax dollars is justified by environmental gains… contrary to the company’s initial hype, the Karma will only run for thirty-two miles on its electric motors before its turbocharged gasoline engine needs to kick in (as opposed to the initial estimate of fifty miles). Once that occurs, the Karma gets about the same mileage as a Ford Explorer. Not the new Explorer, even. The older, gas-hog, body-on-frame model. We’re talking twenty miles per gallon, folks. So much for your “green investment.”

The Karma is a $100,000 car, intended for the most niche of all markets: green-conscious ultra-rich types who can afford to blow $100,000 on a non-performance vehicle that has a little bit (a little bit) of eco-prestige.

How many cars could they possibly sell? How many multimillionaires are in the market for a gas-electric hybrid that costs $100,000 and looks like a cartoon version of a Corvette?

Is the thing actually delivering some kind of technological breakthrough? Not really.

Fisker said the EPA had rated the Karma at 54 MPGe (MPG-equivalent) when running on electricity from its battery pack, and that the EPA-rated electric range would be 32 miles.

But the other half of the window sticker--the 20-mpg rating for a Karma running on power from its range-extending gasoline engine--appeared nowhere in the release.

The only other series hybrid on the market, the 2012 Chevrolet Volt--with a less powerful electric motor and smaller gasoline engine--is rated at 94 MPGe in electric mode, and 37 mpg on gasoline, with an electric range of 35 miles.

...

Electric-car advocates privately express concern that critics both of electric cars and of the DoE low-interest loan program that helped fund Karma development will jump all over the gas-mileage figure, using it to criticize DoE efforts to aid advanced vehicle technologies.

So what seems to be going on here is that the Fisker Karma uses the performance equivalent of technology already on the market today, and is really only offering to give you an under-engineered gas-hybrid with some luxe features and styling.

The "innovative technology" here isn't really technology at all, but conventional niche-marketing. It's a gas-electric for the sorts of people who buy top-range luxury sedans at $100,000 a pop.

And American workers won't even build it. It's being built in Finland.

For this we should spend a half billion dollars?

Keep that in mind as you read the defenses of the expenditure, as reported by ABCNews.

With the approval of the Obama administration, an electric car company that received a $529 million federal government loan guarantee is assembling its first line of cars in Finland, saying it could not find a facility in the United States capable of doing the work.

Vice President Joseph Biden heralded the Energy Department's $529 million loan to the start-up electric car company called Fisker as a bright new path to thousands of American manufacturing jobs. But two years after the loan was announced, the company's manufacturing jobs are still limited to the assembly of the flashy electric Fisker Karma sports car in Finland.

"There was no contract manufacturer in the U.S. that could actually produce our vehicle," the car company's founder and namesake told ABC News. "They don't exist here."

Henrik Fisker said the U.S. money has been spent on engineering and design work that stayed in the U.S., not on the 500 manufacturing jobs that went to a rural Finnish firm, Valmet Automotive.

"We're not in the business of failing; we're in the business of winning. So we make the right decision for the business," Fisker said. "That's why we went to Finland."

Uh-huh. By the way, they will offer a different rationale for the move to Finland a bit later.

But for now -- a start-up company spent $529 million only on engineering and design?

I don't find that plausible. Especially because this vehicle's technical specifications are so low-side-of-mediocre. Based on their weak electric-range/miles-per-gallon-equivalent figures, it looks to me, as I said, that basic off-the-shelf technology is powering this car. The "innovation" lies in just saying "Let's do a high-end gas-electric hybrid." And that's it.

Did they design their own proprietary batteries and drive trains and so on? If they did, they did not seem to advance the state of the art, but merely created an inferior proprietary version of what larger auto manufacturers were already achieving.

Again: This is what we get for $529 million?

A half billion dollars on cartoony design choices combined with below-industry-average technical specifications?

Now, remember earlier it was claimed that the work had to be done in Finland, because no US site was capable of doing the work?

That's not true. It's just that... it would cost more to do it in America.

In a lengthy interview, Fisker said he apprised the Department of Energy of his decision to assemble the high-priced Karma in Finland after he could not find an American facility that could handle the work. They signed off, he said, so long as he did not spend the federal loan money in Finland -- something he says the company has taken care to avoid. He said the decision, ultimately, was to help prevent his company from following the path of Solyndra, which exhausted nearly all of its loan money on a high-tech solar manufacturing plant in Freemont, California.

"If you just start doing like what Solyndra did, making a factory in a place where it was too expensive to manufacture Â… [you] obviously fail," he said.

That's a perfectly valid business decision... except for the fact that a half-billion American, not Finnish, taxpayer dollars went in to "designing" this (wink, wink).

A Department of Energy spokesman pushes the "innovation" claim:

"Two years ago, critics said we shouldn't be investing in American auto manufacturing at all because the industry wouldn't survive," said Damien LaVera, an Energy Department spokesman. "They were wrong then and they're wrong today. From well-established names like Ford to innovative startups like Tesla and Fisker, America's auto industry is being reinvented. Continuing this turnaround demands more innovation, not defeatism. While supporting innovative technologies always carries a degree of risk, these investments deliver long-term benefits."

Once again, the car has a shorter electric range than the Chevy Volt (which I take to be the current industry standard) and gets worse miles-per-gallon on its gas engine.

Now that's probably largely because this Karma is a larger car with more features. But wouldn't "innovative technology" deliver some breakthrough, like being able to match (or nearly match) the Chevy Volt's performance but with a bigger, heavier vehicle?

Again, it just seems like we're paying to take pre-existing technology (or at least "new technology" which nevertheless fails to improve upon the old) and sticking it into the chassis of a cartoon-car sedan, and calling that a "major technological innovation."

If Ford just sticks a gas electric engine into the body of a Mustang, can they have $500 million, too?

Actually over one billion has been spent, with the rest going to another car company, Tesla. Because Tesla is a publicly-held firm, we've seen its books, and... it loses money every quarter.

While over one billion in loans (ahem, loans) has been approved for both companies combined, $300 million has been actually drawn down so far between them. (Note that keep saying that a half billion went to designing the Karma; that's not really true. Not yet. They can draw up to $529 million in loans. So far, between Tesla and Fisker (which makes, hypothetically, the Karma), $300 million have been drawn; I don't know how much of that is attributable to "designing' the Karma.)

And of course both Tesla and Fisker are politically-connected. Of course they are. Because when you're selling a political product, your true customers are politicians, aren't they?

Folks, we're making a bet," Biden said on Oct. 27, 2009. "We're making a bet on the future, we're making a bet on the American people, we're making a bet on the market, we're making a bet on innovation."

The announcement that the plant would re-open followed a heavy lobbying push by Delaware politicians from both parties, who cited the news as a sign of industry's turnaround. In September 2009, Republican Rep. Mike Castle wrote directly to Energy Secretary Steven Chu, saying the Fisker proposal had "great merit," and urging Chu to give the company "careful consideration" for the loan.

I had to put that in, for those who opposed Castle. Yes, he was a giant douche.

The governor and state politicians took turns, along with Biden, to proclaim the project to cheering blue-collar workers clad in jeans, caps and jackets. They said it would produce thousands of jobs and have cars rolling off the line by next year. Fisker said he remains convinced those jobs will come. While he has hired marketing, design and engineering teams in the U.S., the auto plant jobs in Wilmington right now number about 100.

And yet, the plant is in Finland. Spending this kind of money, we couldn't even have demanded that the plant would be in the US?

The Department of Energy loan to Fisker closed in April 2010, and again Biden took center stage in a department statement announcing the loan. "The story of Fisker is a story of ingenuity of an American company, a commitment to innovation by the U.S. government and the perseverance of the American auto industry," said the vice president.

ABC News sent questions to the White House Monday and requested an interview with the vice president. Biden was not made available, but an official in his office said "the Office of the Vice President did not encourage the Department of Energy to choose any particular company over any other but, like others in the Administration, supported the Department's loan program and the creation of car manufacturing jobs in the United States."

Energy Department officials have been steadfast that politics never entered the picture and each project was screened by professionals and secured on the merits. And executives from Tesla and Fisker said they won government support because their projects had the best shot at success. They said the involvement of well-connected figures in their companies should not suggest they attempted to use special influence to secure the loans.

Both companies have political heavyweights behind them.

I won't cut and paste the bigtime Democratic donors behind this. It's on page 3 of the story. But of course Al Gore makes an appearance... but not a comment.

Former Vice President Al Gore is another Kleiner Perkins senior partner. Gore could not be reached for comment.

Here's the kicker. With so much taxpayer money being pissed away on Democratic pet projects -- "stimulus," they call it -- Obama's actually doubling down on failure. One of his guys at OMB basically threatens an Obama veto of any budget that reduces his "green energy" mad-money.

In a letter from OMB director Jack Lew to congressional appropriators, the administration cites “critical domestic priorities” necessary to “win the future” such as full funding for the implementation of Obamacare, which presumably includes the CLASS Act, full funding for the Dodd-Frank financial regulatory regime and, last but not least, full funding for the Department of Energy’s Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Programs.

That’s right, the same “green” energy initiative that brought us Solyndra, and for which the administration has requested no less than $1.95 billion this year.

Republicans will presumably put the presidentÂ’s words to the test. As well they should.

$1.95 billion more this year for this crap.

But then, as Obama has said, we could not possibly cut another dime from the domestic budget.

Posted by: Ace at 09:52 AM | Comments (230)
Post contains 2117 words, total size 14 kb.

Obama making the announcement now.

This is on the schedule negotiated by George W. Bush but it had been thought that some US troops (trainers and special forces at least) would stay as part of a negotiated deal with the Iraqis. Now, that's not going to happen.

Obama is simply going to declare victory an end and be done with it.

Today the President will announce that we will fulfill our commitment and complete the drawdown of U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of the year,” a White House official said in a statement. “This will allow us to say definitively that the Iraq war is over, and that the partnership between the US and Iraq will be a normal one between two sovereign nations.”

The failure to reach an agreement could pose security problems for the Iraqi government, still largely divided by sect and ethnicity, and for an Obama administration that inherited the war but has pledged an orderly withdrawal.

If sectarian strife or other violence should break out in Iraq once U.S. forces have left, Obama could be blamed, particularly by his conservative critics, for abandoning Iraq after nearly nine years of war before it was ready to protect itself.

Iran's pretty happy today. The Saudis? Probably not so much.

Was the sticking point the Iraqis?

Posted by: DrewM at 08:51 AM | Comments (275)
Post contains 243 words, total size 2 kb.

Haven't seen hide nor hair of the head Ewok today. OWS presents such a target-rich environment for hobos that he may be overwhelmed.

Here are a couple of interesting GOP 2012 presidential race tidbits:

Michele Bachmann paid New Hampshire staffers quit en masse

... Michele Bachmann's entire paid campaign team - roughly a half-dozen staffers - in New Hampshire has quit out of frustration with the campaign.

That's gonna leave a mark.

@THEHermanCain "if you're at or below the poverty level, your plan isn't 999, it's 909."

Rumors are the Rick Perry will counter with a plan called "five-five-five dollar footlong."

So now what are we talking about?

Posted by: andy at 07:58 AM | Comments (221)
Post contains 120 words, total size 1 kb.

Looks like the core Democrat constituencies the bill was aimed at are going to need to find another teat. This sow's full.

President Barack ObamaÂ’s jobs agenda hit another roadblock in the Senate on Thursday night, as the two parties remained locked in a bitter stalemate with the economy sputtering and tens of millions looking for work.

...

A united GOP Conference, along with three members of the Senate Democratic Caucus — Sens. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) — voted 50-50 to block a debate on the package, which would have been funded by a 0.5 percent surtax on those earning more than $1 million

Somewhere right now Hedley Lamarr Joe Biden is workin' up a number 6.

Posted by: andy at 04:57 AM | Comments (385)
Post contains 151 words, total size 1 kb.

Cheers to the freakin' weekend.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 02:48 AM | Comments (196)
Post contains 13 words, total size 1 kb.

So How Does R. Lee Ermey Occupy Himself During Flights

Well like this.

R. Lee isn't afraid of anything - even learning how to knit in public. And before you snicker - just remember that he knows at least 8 different ways to kill you with the yarn and needles alone.

And in other Ermey news:
What R. Lee Really Thinks About The State of the US
Full Metal Jacket - Disney Version
And what the hell does "If it shortdicks every cannibal in the Congo" From Full Metal Jacket actually mean?
And genghis points out that the movie Full Metal Jacket was actually based on the novel, "The Short-timers", by Gustav Hasford based on his experiences in Vietnam.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 06:00 PM | Comments (449)
Post contains 462 words, total size 5 kb.

Earlier today, the Washington Post ran a breathless story claiming that Sen. Rubio embellishes his family story when he says that his parents fled Fidel Castro to come to the United States. According to the Post, Rubio's parents became LPRs two years before Castro rose to power.

The only problem? Rubio apparently never said that his parents fled Castro to come to the United States. WaPo embellished that little detail. Miami Herald does the legwork:

But the top of the [Washington Post] story suggests Rubio himself has given this "dramatatic account:" that "he was the son of exiles, he told audiences, Cuban Americans forced off their beloved island after 'a thug,' Fidel Castro, took power."

However, the story doesn't cite one speech where Rubio actually said that.

To back up the lead, the Washington Post excerpts from a 2006 address in the Florida House where Rubio said “in January of 1959 a thug named Fidel Castro took power in Cuba and countless Cubans were forced to flee... Today your children and grandchildren are the secretary of commerce of the United States and multiple members of Congress...and soon, even speaker of the Florida House.”

The catch: If you listen to the speech, Rubio isn't just talking about those who specifically fled Cuba after Castro took power. He doesn't say that his parents fled Cuba. Instead, he was talking about "a community of exiles." That is: He was talking about all the Cubans who live in Miami.

The Washington Post story has all the classics: elided quotes, vague assertions, and even vaguer sources. And, of course, multiple layers of painstaking editorial fact-checking.

Rubio issued this response:

“To suggest my family’s story is embellished for political gain is outrageous. The dates I have given regarding my family’s history have always been based on my parents’ recollections of events that occurred over 55 years ago and which were relayed to me by them more than two decades after they happened. I was not made aware of the exact dates until very recently.

“What’s important is that the essential facts of my family’s story are completely accurate. My parents are from Cuba. After arriving in the United States, they had always hoped to one day return to Cuba if things improved and traveled there several times. In 1961, my mother and older siblings did in fact return to Cuba while my father stayed behind wrapping up the family’s matters in the U.S. After just a few weeks living there, she fully realized the true nature of the direction Castro was taking Cuba and returned to the United States one month later, never to return.

"They were exiled from the home country they tried to return to because they did not want to live under communism. That is an undisputed fact and to suggest otherwise is outrageous.”

When Rubio says he did not know the exact details until recently, what he means is that some Birthers intent on somehow proving that he's not a "natural-born citizen" dug up his parents' adjustment and naturalization paperwork. That's where WaPo got the dates for his parents' arrival to the United States.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 05:06 PM | Comments (99)
Post contains 538 words, total size 4 kb.

And also, Obama is a SCOAMF.

Posted by: Ace at 04:28 PM | Comments (94)
Post contains 12 words, total size 1 kb.

The predatory lawsuit factory/ extortion scheme known as RightHaven has been having all sorts of legal problems, culminating in a rejection of their latest emergency motion.

Because of courtroom defeats at the hands of Hoehn and other defendants, RighthavenÂ’s financial condition has deteriorated.

Its lawsuit settlement revenue is dwindling and it hasnÂ’t filed lawsuits for months while it waits for one or more of the Nevada judges to rule on whether it can sue under an amended lawsuit contract with the Review-Journal.
-------------------------------------------

Righthaven had argued to the appeals court Sept. 27 that without a stay in the Hoehn case, “Righthaven may be forced to file bankruptcy to protect its intellectual property and propriety assets from seizure and liquidation.”

9th Circuit's response to RightHaven's plight, loosely paraphrased: "Boo-frickin'-hoo."

Clayton Cramer speculates on what this will mean for RightHaven's future. And it is deeeelicious.

Thanks to Retired Geezer (aka Man Of Substance) who unfortunately had excised much of his older blog content to protect himself from RightHaven's lawsuit thugs.

Posted by: LauraW at 04:19 PM | Comments (78)
Post contains 178 words, total size 2 kb.