Solyndra Dead Enders: Our Talking Points Are News


“Republican talking points are delivered as first-order news,” writes Grist’s David Roberts. “Liberal talking points are wrapped in meta-news about liberals and their talking points. It makes liberals sound defensive and manipulative, and it’s condescending as sh*t.”

Roberts isn’t alone in believing the “faux scandal” over Fremont, California-based solar panel innovator Solyndra LLC is getting too much coverage from the mainstream media. Joe Romm, a global warming blogger at the Center for American Progress (an organization that recently had to bid a fond adieu to Steven Spinner, the Harry Lime of the Soyndra scandal), calls Solyndra “the royal wedding of energy stories.” 

This Solyndra coverage is enough to drive a man bald.

What’s got Roberts and Romm’s carbon emissions up? It’s a story by Politico’s Darren Samuelsohn acknowledging that environmental activists are uncomfortable with the amount of scrutiny the Solyndra story is getting. 

Since these are tough times for green pork consumers, it’s only sporting to acknowledge where the Solyndra dead enders have a point. Roberts is correct that liberals sound defensive and manipulative â€" an impression that the Obama administration is enhancing with its Solyndra stonewalling. The House Energy and Commerce Committee is still trying to get the administration to cough up more documentation on the Solyndra scandal, which encompasses not only the original half-billion-dollar taxpayer guaranteed loan but a subsequent restructuring of the loan that subordinated taxpayers to Solyndra’s investors. 

The Department of Energy, under the leadership of Nobel prize winner Steven Chu, has also been stonewalling the House, most recently with its refusal to let Susan Richardson, chief counsel of the DOE’s loan programs office, testify. (Here’s the House letter on that matter [pdf]). On the plus side, a Republican on the Energy and Commerce Committee says the taciturn Chu may finally appear next week â€" nearly two months after Solyndra’s bankruptcy became national news and nearly 10 months after the depth of the company’s troubles became known to the administration. 

As for Romm’s claim, well, I guess you could say that Prince William did in fact marry Kate Middleton, that the media reported assiduously (and as far as I know, accurately) on this event, and that people were interested in it. Similarly, taxpayers did in fact lose $528 million on a company backed by Obama cronies, this outrage has attracted the attention of news consumers, and the media have done a competent job of covering it. I’ve mentioned the fine work of the Washington Post, but ABC News and Politico itself have also been instrumental in piecing together the story, while the Los Angeles Times turned up the detail that Obama’s own economic brain trust tried to head off the disastrous deal. 

And by the way, the Solyndra news keeps moving even when you’re standing still. National Review has an interesting report on the favorable treatment the company got from the IRS, which did a rules clarification [pdf] allowing Solyndra clients to get a 30 percent tax break. The IRS ruling was widely publicized at the time, by Solyndra [pdf] and others. That the company still managed to fail so spectacularly despite all this help from Uncle Sam almost takes the story from the farcical to the heroic. Almost. 

Meanwhile, the Sunlight Foundation provides details on the taxpayer-fleecing career of George Kaiser, the billionaire Obama fundraiser and bundler whose investment vehicles owned the largest stake in Solyndra. And Fox Business had an excellent report recently on the Federal Financing Bank, which funnels your money to questionable companies. As Elizabeth MacDonald reports, the FFB actually fits President Obama’s mocking description of China’s own  green subsidies: “basically state-run banks giving money to state-run companies and ignoring losses and ignoring, you know, bad management."

Speaking of China, here’s the latest attempt to blame the Middle Kingdom for creating an environment where Solyndra was unable to carry out its novel strategy of selling panels for less than it cost to make them. 

The competition for the title “Second Solyndra” has become somewhat like the search for the New Dylan in the seventies. The New York Times nominates San Jose-based SoloPower, which got a cool $197 million from the Energy Department. Previous contenders have included SunPower and the Solar Power Project (which came in for its own $737 million DOE loan shortly after Solyndra went south). You’ll also be relieved to know your tax money is helping to build low-emissions sports cars in Finland. And in a rare moment of efficient stimulus, a Tennessee electric truck terminal has managed to go bankrupt with only $400,000 in federal green stimulus. At that rate, profits must be right around the corner. 

The Solyndra dead enders should remember an essential rule of ballooning: If the rope you’re holding starts pulling you off the ground, let go. Getting further away from Planet Earth won’t make your situation any better. 

NEXT: Cartel Involvement in Failed Iranian Assassination Plot Fuels Push for Terrorist Designation

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. 1 kW/m^2. It’s not just a good idea, it’s insolation.


  2. “Liberal talking points are wrapped in meta-news about liberals and their talking points. It makes liberals sound defensive and manipulative, and it’s condescending as sh*t.”
    Yes, liberals *never* get coverage, since the media is controlled by the vast, right-wing conspiracy. Right, Ms. Clinton?

    1. “media is controlled bythe vast right-wing conspiracy.” What planet are you from? CNN, ABC,NBC,CBS,AP,etc etc all support the idiot in chief in ways that now make them irrelevant. The only way to get fair reporting is to read the WSJ or tune in to Fox news.Just trying to help someone who is not very bright. You’re welcome.

      1. joe,
        Reset irony gauge.

  3. Huh, so the liberal greenies don’t like the coverage that Solyndra is getting. Solyndra, you say? Solyndra Solyndra Solyndra Solyndra Solyndra…like that?

    1. Oh how I love Solyndra,
      Away, Away.

      I wish I owned Solyndra,
      Today, Today.

      1. I know nothing of Solyndra,
        Go ‘way, Go ‘way.

        1. Sunshine came softly
          through my window today.
          Could have tripped out easy,
          But I, I’ve changed my ways.

          1. Happy Mondays!

        2. Sunshine go away today,
          I don’t feel much like dancin’
          Some man’s gone, he’s tried to run my life
          Don’t know what he’s askin’

          1. how much does it cost ?

            1. I’ll buy it!

  4. And liberals have never been condescending as shit. Like that short haired bitch Gary Johnson was talking to in NY.

    1. Or our own resident condescender, Tony.

      1. It’s not that I’m condescending, it’s that Obama is infallible.

        1. Obama certainly thinks so, no matter how much evidence exists to the contrary.

          1. Don’t call me a short haired bitch!

  5. Don’t forget about the latest controversy involving the electric car company, Fisker:

    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.”

    1. “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.”

      Then why didn’t he form one? Wasn’t the whole idea to create jobs – American jobs? Or am I just being naive?

      1. This suggests one of two things:

        A) The US lacks the engineers, equipment, and technological expertise to produce an electric vehicle

        B) The tax and regulatory burden in the US makes it difficult, if not impossible, to produce an electric vehicle.

        I know which one my money is on.

        *Hint: it’s not A

        1. Free to Booze you are the man, love the points you are making.

          Rock on.

        2. @free,
          you neglected a third option – there is no viable market for an electric car in teh US, particularly one with a price tag near six figures.

    2. Bullshit. There are plenty of places such cars could be assembled here in America.

      But they’d cost too much, because the UAW would get involved, and… well, you get the point.

    3. I read that Fisker was Chu’s personal decision.

    4. Hey! Don’t fuck with me.



      1. Shit, man. Brevity, wit and the rest of that shit. You could have shortened down to one word:


      2. I’ve dropped my gun, got my hands in the air, please don’t shoot!!!

        1. Don’t kill my dog!

      3. Can’t tell if troll or just really stupid.

        Damn Pow’s Law.

        1. My money’s on parody.

          1. “GRANT SCHEME”


            1. They’re using a name like KILLALLTHEKOCHS1848?

              That’s gotta be parody.

        2. Rule of thumb:

          If All Caps, then “Stupid > Troll”


        I’m not one of the 1%, but I’m not one of the 99% either.

        I’m gettin’ kinda sick of being shoehorned into that silly movement.

        If Occupy Wall Street thinks 99% of the American people out there support them? Then they’re just kidding themselves.

        1. If 99% of the American people really supported them, then there should be nothing to stop the “Occupiers” from banding together their collective resources, creating their own companies, and creating products and services according to their “socially responsible” standards. If this movement truly represents the 99%, then they would have no shortage of customers, regardless of whether or not their production costs, and prices were higher. What better way to strike out at the “1%”, than by putting them out of business?

          Of course, it would turn out just like the “Green” energy industry. Lot’s of people claiming to want alternative solutions to oil and gas, but unwilling to put their money where their mouth is.

        2. “If Occupy Wall Street thinks 99% of the American people out there support them?”

          No, OWS thinks they represent 99% of the American people, whether those 99% want them to or not.

          1. I am the 53% – taxpayers.

      5. Kind of makes me miss shrike… Btw: has anyone seen shrike lately?

        1. Tony has him chained up in his basement.

        2. I just skipped over the all-caps post and figured it was a Steve Smith parody.

        3. I’m here Christ Fag.

      6. Without [BRACKETS], cannot be taken seriously, even if it is spoof, or humor.

        1. [BRACKETS]you certainly are the droll one today[BRACKETS]

    2. We can’t hear you. Could you speak louder, please?

    3. You do realize that the so called “experts”, are the same “1%” you claim to despise. Take Obama’s jobs council for example:

      Jeffrey Immelt – Chairman/CEO GE
      Ursula Burns – Chairman/CEO Xerox
      Kenneth Chenault – Chairman/CEO American Express
      A.G Lafley – former Chairman/CEO Proctor and Gamble
      Jim McNenrny – Chairman/CEO Boeing
      Richard Parsons – Chairman CitiGroup
      Antonio Perez – Chairman/CEO Eastman Kodak
      Penny Pritzker – Chairman of the Board TransUnion
      Robert Wolf – Chairman UBS investment bank

      To name a few. All of these members are campaign contributors to the President, and have done a great job securing tax payer money for their companies. Kodak and Xerox have greatly downsized their US work force, and have “shipped jobs overseas”.

      So yes, let’s continue to allow the cronies.. I mean “intellectuals” solve the jobs crisis.

    4. I AGREE!!!

      1. “I AGREE”

        1. CONSENSUS!

    5. DEM4Obama,

      last I checked all caps and expletive laden language is a poor way to prove yourself as an enlightened intellectual. BTW Obama has been in office for almost 3 years and has done nothing to enable private sector job creation whilst furthering us into historic national debt. Obama has outspent any president in the history of the US per GDP dollars. This includes 2 term presidents.

      I’ll give Obama credit. He’s the fastest spending president ever. In that regard he is unbelievably efficient.

      Keep cursing, you’ll just drown your own argument

      1. even I know that a regular spoofing

    6. Communism OR Corporatism = false choice by braindead sheep.

      1. Communism OR Capitalism = false choice by braindead sheep.

        They’re both cronyism, all day, every day.

  7. It’s not a “Republican talking point”, it’s a taxpayers’ “what the FUCK” question. Half a billion dollars to a pack of shysters who couldn’t get any private backing? Obama and the rest of the kids on the Green Team got some esplainin’ to do.


    1. If you can’t get private backing, that means you don’t have a prayer of making it work.

  8. Obama keeps falling down

  9. “Speaking of China, here’s the latest attempt to blame the Middle Kingdom for creating an environment where Solyndra was unable to carry out its novel strategy of selling panels for less than it cost to make them.”

    That’s the big news in this story!

    “Seven American makers of solar panels filed a broad trade case in Washington against the Chinese solar industry on Wednesday, accusing….China of dumping solar panels in the United States for less than it costs to manufacture and ship them.

    “American solar operations should be rapidly expanding to keep pace with the skyrocketing demand for these products,” said Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon. “But that is not what has been happening,” Mr. Wyden said. “There seems to be one primary explanation for this; that is, that China is cheating.”…..ports.html

    This is disgraceful. You got the democrats out of one side of their mouths screaming about global warming and how we have to do something about it–and then, out of the other side of their mouths, they’re doing what they can to keep inexpensive solar panels out of the hands of American consumers?!

    Yeah, the world should realign itself so that the Obama Administration’s stupid plans don’t look so stupid?

    Anytime you see people arguing that the solution to a problem is slapping a tariff on something so that American consumers have to pay more for the same thing? You know they’ve run out of other arguments.

    Wouldn’t it be great if this were true? If the Chinese government underwrote making more things cheaper for American consumers? In an elaborate conspiracy to trick us into saving money on the stuff we buy?

    If there’s one thing that doesn’t scare me, it’s the prospect of American consumers getting more stuff for less. …and as libertarian who really is concerned about global warming? Cheap solar for American consumers doesn’t scare me either.

    1. I also always want to bring up the fact to liberals that Chinese people are in fact people as well. Apparently to them, upward mobility should only be for Americans. Total hypocrisy.

        1. Wow, this is most amazing thing I’ve ever seen! Pretty racist though; not every Russian girl is a rhythmic gymnast. Only about 70%. The rest are figure skaters.

          1. Nice job stereotyping, asshole.

            You forgot that 17% of them are professional tennis players!

            1. Tennis playing figure skaters or tennis playing gymnasts? :3

      1. I wonder…when NATO, led from the rear by Fearless Obama, bombed the crap out of Libya, China pulled out its 36,000 oil and construction workers from that country. Was that cheating on Obama’s part?

        1. Because he’ll “share” the reconstruction and oil contracts with the Euros. China had their chance and couldn’t stand the heat. So Obama says, “fuck ’em”.

        2. Just pushing Iran and China closer to an alliance.

    2. Not totally related, but I saw that clip of Herman Cain explaining that his 9-9-9 plan would grant tax exempt status for purchases made in America only. Republicans are obviously not immune from being total idiots with regard to trade policy.

    3. So, an industry that relies heavily on government subsidies to lower the cost of their products, is complaining that China is subsidizing their domestic industries, to lower the cost of their products.

      Ain’t hypocrisy grand!

  10. Professor do you believe Our Creator allows freewill?

    Professor: Sure, I’ll play along.

    Did you support Obamacare?

    Professor: Yes.

    Then you do not accept freewill and you are a potential tyrant.

    Professor: You just flunked this course pal.

    Hey climate scientist, do you believe Our Creator allows freewill?

    Climate scientist: I don’t believe a Creator exist let alone that one allows freewill.

    AGW Skeptic: Einstein was right: Science without the [Creator] is blind and religion without the [Creator] is lame.

    Climate scientist: Silence skeptic! We must sacrifice your rights and do what’s best for society as we see fit. Don’t you know science is a democracy fool!

    AGW Skeptic: Ben Franklin was right.

    CRU emails: Burn the Skeptic’s book!!

    Hey Hillary, Nancy, Harry, Obama, progressive intellectuals and Dems, do you believe Our Creator allows freewill?

    Choir: We must sacrifice the rights of the individual and do what’s best for society.

    Who decides what’s best? Certainly not society -see Obamacare.

    Choir: From one, many -see Obamacare.

    Al Gore: e pluribus unum – from one, many. The science is settled! Everybody knows science is a democracy – the skeptics are trying to turn science upside down – leading to backwards conclusions.

    Saul Alinsky: Pick a target, freeze it, smear it, ridicule it.

    Professor: The founders were racist capitalist pig slave holders.

    Common Sense: I see a pattern: Professor with all due respect the Founding Fathers knew they couldn’t fight the Civil War before the American Revolution or shortly thereafter and remain United States. They were wise enough to put mechanisms in place though.

    Hey JournoList, do you believe Our Creator allows freewill?

    JournoList: We must sacrifice the profession and do what is best for society.

    Hey Islamic radicals. Do you believe Our Creator allows freewill?

    Radical Islam: ___________

    1. Who the hell are you?

      White Indian’s spiritual successor?

    2. Al Gore: e pluribus unum – from one, many.

      Sorry, Al, but I think you need a refresher course in Latin. E Pluribus Unum means
      From Many, One

      1. Indeed he does and how bizarre is it you can apply the concept through history and know immediately who denys the self evident scientifically proven by a simple “G-Dammit” CONCEPT that Our Creator allows freewill. And those who deny the concept have abused their power over individuals throughout.

        To deny Our Creator allows freewill is to deny freewill itself. Without freewill there will never be freedom.

        Stop confusing what religions have done abusing the simple concept and understand that if we were One Nation Under Creator[CONCEPT} we wouldn’t have many of the problems with religion and politics trying to squash the individual and freewill itself.

        1. Your thinking is lazy.

          1. Hey Bill O’Really, Dr. K., FOX News, do you believe Our Creator allows freewill?

            FOX Choir: Why do they even have all these debates? Don’t the people know Romney is inevitable….it’s inevitable that Romney is inevitable…Romney is the only inevitable candidate….Romney…Romney…..Romney….

          2. Food, vermin, etc.

        2. On free will, this is useful.

          1. Also, I suppose, you could go to wikipedia and read up on compatibilism.

          2. Hey King George III, do you believe Our Creator allows freewill?

            King George III: I will squash you for even suggesting it is not my divine right to rule over you.

  11. I’m digging the new H&R format, which converts lefty comments to appear in caps. Very realistic. It makes me feel like I’m in the middle of Zucotti park, listening to all of the screaming, incoherent rants of the occupiers.

    1. Yet it spares you the smell. Which I hear is approaching the olfactory equivalent of water boarding.

      1. There are days when anosmia isn’t such a bad thing to have.

  12. If you really believed in subsidizing green energy, you would want people to pay for Solyandra. It was a fraud and presumably took money that could have been given to a better company. But I don’t think these people believe in anything other than their side winning and never being wrong about anything.

  13. To me solyandra is terrible, much worse than some of the ‘scandals’ resting on conjecture and assumption alone, because the scandal of Solyandra is not “did the administration know it was going under or did they just give money to their buddies.” The scandal is the government taking money from taxpayers and giving it to private interests, period. This is socialized costs and private properties, an invitation and example of crony capitallism. For liberals to defend Solyandra is disgusting.

    1. “The scandal is the government taking money from taxpayers and giving it to private interests, period. This is socialized costs and private properties, an invitation and example of crony capitallism.”

      I appreciate the moral angle, not that I think squandering taxpayer money on clearly public interests is effectively superior–for being squandered in the public interest?

      What really bother me about this though is the frightening stupidity behind the idea that the Obama Administration is somehow better at being a venture capitalist–better than venture capitalists?

      If not a single bank in the country would give them a loan–unless the government would cosign? Then that’s a really good indication that loan shouldn’t be made.

      The moral case of squandering the taxpayers’ hard-earned money by playing venture capitalist is what most people are reacting to, but the bigger problem is the profound ignorance exhibited by the Obama Administration in thinking they were somehow competent enough to make these decisions.

      As somebody who’s helped raise a lot of money for various ventures over the years, I gots to tell ya’ll–the academics and career bureaucrats that make up the Obama Administration don’t have what it takes to make good investment decisions.

      In other words, the reason this form of central planning doesn’t work isn’t because it’s immoral. The reason this form of central planning doesn’t work is the same reason every other form of central planning doesn’t work, and that’s the basis of my criticism here.

    2. + 1 DoE loan to Solyndra.

    3. +100.

      That is the real issue. If Solyndra had been SUCCESSFUL, it would have been no better. Using taxpayer funds to help private investors turn a profit is at least as horrifying as wasting taxpayer funds on a make-work project.

      The playing field should be level. If you want the government to do R&D, give the money to the NSF and have it distributed in grants to universities, with results publicly published in journals for anyone to use.

      Giving it to a privately owned commercial enterprise, to give them extra help competing in the market is just grossly unfair. Both to tax payers and to their unsubsidized competitors.

    4. I’m glad you’re reasonable about Solyndra.

      However, assuming the scandal you’re scare quoting is the Fast & Furious debacle, do recall that no one uses transparent solar panels to kill people.

      Well, except maybe Chuck Norris.

  14. The Tea Party has Hayek? Does Occupy Wall Street Need Rawls?

    Despite providing a remarkable venue for what Al Gore called a “primal scream of democracy,” Occupy Wall Street is leveraged too heavily on the rhetoric of rage rather than reciprocity. Rawls would argue that Occupy is fully justified in its criticism of the political and economic structures that propagate massive concentrations of wealth; he saw the “basic structure” of society as the “primary subject of justice.” But Rawls would lament the tendency of the “99 percent” to misdirect their energies into hatred of individuals in the 1 percent. He would have them save their hostility for the policies and institutions that have permitted only the wealthiest to enjoy significant gains from the past two decades of economic growth.

    Rawls’s boldest claim ? that inequality in society is only justified if its least well-off members fare better than they would under any other scheme ? could provide a lodestar for the protests. Rawls was no Marxist: this “difference principle” acknowledges that a productive, free society will be home to at least some degree of inequality. But the principle insists that if the rich get richer while wages and social capital of the poor and middle class are stagnant or falling, there is something seriously wrong.

    This idea is built on the premise that in a just society, citizens should be understood as free and equal participants in a system of social cooperation. Some individuals may be more motivated and harder working, and thus can legitimately expect greater rewards for their efforts. But everyone deserves the same bundle of individual rights and liberties, and everyone is entitled to “fair equality of opportunity,” including access to a decent education and a genuine chance of success in pursuing one’s life plans.


    1. Despite providing a remarkable venue for what Al Gore called a “primal scream of democracy,”

      I continue to wonder, by what multiple does the words per protestor ratio at OWS exceed the ratio for the Tea Parties?

      The Tea Parties, I guess, made the bad decision to operate in flyover country. The brainless provincialism of NYers and NYer wannabes in other cities never ceases to amaze.

      Prediction: In 20 years, the talk will be about how the Tea Parties were one of the more transformative grassroots movements since, say, the prohibitionists. The OWSers will be barely a footnote.

      1. Prediction: In 20 years, the talk will be about how the Tea Parties were one of the more transformative grassroots movements since, say, the prohibitionists. The OWSers will be barely a footnote.

        Depends on how Full Metal Rousseau they (OWS’ers) are willing to go…

        But you’re probably right.

  15. Solarworld is the next Solyndra, with hundreds of millions in government subsidies on the line. Their desperate China-hating says it all — they’ll take the whole solar industry down with ’em.

  16. “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.”

    There might have been if those idiots in Washington hadn’t thrown the zombie lifeline to GM and Chrysler, I suspect.

    1. But..but…GREEN JOBS AND FULL EMPLOYMENT, P Brooks!!!zomg!one!11!! The sun: limitless, clean and pure energy! Daryl Hannah said so!

  17. Speaking of tariffs, and imposing higher costs on American consumers for the benefit of special pleaders, I need tires for my truck. $150.- per corner is pretty much the starting point, these days.

    Thanks, teamsters!

    1. Did you try

  18. Oops- Steelworkers, not Teamsters.

    The tire tariff will amount to 35 percent the first year, 30 percent the second and 25 percent the third.

    Although a federal trade panel had recommended higher levies — of 55, 45 and 35 percent, respectively — the decision is considered a victory for the United Steelworkers union, which filed the trade complaint.

    “The president sent the message that we expect others to live by the rules, just as we do,” Leo W. Gerard, president of the union, said Friday night.

    Rules? What rules? Price yourself out of the market, and run to Washington for a bailout?


  19. I did try Tire Rack; best price so far (haven’t checked shipping yet- that could be a deal-breaker).

    I have used them several times in the past.

    Putting five or six hundred dollars’ worth of tires on what is about an eight hundred dollar 4wd truck would be deeply hurtful to me.

    1. Go back to bias ply tires.

  20. The most interesting thing about the loan to me was descriptions by insiders of how financial responsibility left the building with the cash-lanche. A company that never made a profit built their new board room with glass walls that could be turned some kind of opaque smoke colour during meetings. It’s like they were trying to convince themselves success was at hand.

    1. Naah.
      It was like they were spending other peoples’ money.

    2. Pity they never got around to buying a professional sports team. The smartest guys in the room are incapable of learning from history.

  21. Idiots opine.

    Members of an unlimited hydroplane boat series, along with SAFER barrier engineer Dr. Dean Sicking, believe it’s time for the IndyCar Series to consider enclosed cockpits.

    If you’re too much of a pussy to get in an Indy car (I’m looking at you, Jimmy Johnson), perhaps you should try something else. ALMS has full bodywork. So does NASCAB.


    1. Doesn’t ALMS leave it up to the teams whether they have open or closed cockpits for the LMP1 and LMP2 classes?

      It’s been a while since I watched one of those races, but IIRC, there were still open cockpit units on the track. Obviously, this rules out the GT classes entirely, but I am sure I’ve seen open cockpit prototypes out there.

      And JJ is a pussy. It’s a shame he has more “championships” that Gordon, since his mentor is twice the driver Johnson is.

    2. Mark Webber reacts to Dan Wheldon’s death…..376777.stm

    3. One of the problems with Indy Car racing is that some of the drivers simply aren’t very good. I’ve seen way too many drivers crash into their pit crews and just not be able to handle the power of those machines as well as, say, an F1 driver.

      Which is why I don’t really watch Indy Cars.

      1. Most American’s haven’t heard of F1.

        1. That would be Formula Un – racing for polite drivers who sip tea with their little fingers extended.

        2. Maybe they don’t need Windows Help.

    4. too much of a pussy to get in an Indy car

      Right, the true test of manhood is willingness to risk getting burnt to a crisp so that people can watch you drive around in circles.

  22. I “think” they have changed the rules to closed-cockpit cars, with a phase-out of open cars, but I’m not positive. I believe all the new chassis are closed cockpit tubs.

  23. “They” being ALMS and their parent, ACO (automobile club de l’ouest).

    And, as far as I am concerned, the only NASCAB drivers qualified to talk about Indycar are Stewart, Montoya, and Hornish, because they’ve been there.

    1. What about Danica?

    2. Robby Gordon? John Andretti?

      (Not that they are significant NASCAR drivers anymore.)

  24. “Liberal talking points are wrapped in meta-news about liberals and their talking points. It makes liberals sound defensive and manipulative, and it’s condescending as sh*t.”

    I would like to see this quote in an article about how only liberals use the word “meta”. It would be very, you know…

    1. It makes liberals sound defensive and manipulative
      in other words, it makes liberals sound pretty much as they are, which kills the entire illusion about their being smarter and better than anyone else.

  25. Jody Scheckter came out and said he doesn’t like Tomas driving Indy cars, and wants him to quit. That’s kind of funny, because if you offered somebody like Scott Dixon an opportunity to drive the car Jody won the championship in (at Goodwood, say) there’s a very real possibility he’d say, “Are you kidding? I’m not getting in that deathtrap.”

  26. Since these are tough times for green pork consumers

    Would that make Roberts and Romm a pair of green ham and eggers?

    1. Would you like some stimulus?
      Would you like it, paid by us?

  27. “Since these are tough times for green pork consumers”
    more like the highwater mark for green pork consumers

  28. What makes this all so so great is that it is a virtual inevitability that there WILL be a “Second Solyndra”.

    It’s just an economic fact that solar power cannot compete on a level playing field with nuclear, coal, and natgural gas.

    What baffles me is how solar advocates can possibly believe that this is going to be an isolated incident. They aren’t retarded. They know it’s not profitable. They KNOW that the instant subsidies run out these companies will go broke.

    I can’t believe they are that deluded that they actually believe that shovelling billions of dollars at something will make it profitable. They can’t be, can they?

    1. I can’t believe they are that deluded that they actually believe that shovelling billions of dollars at something will make it profitable. They can’t be, can they?

      Welcome to the religion of Eco-theology. At least Scientology isn’t government subsidized.

      The Solyndra hydra is the natural progression of other boondoggles such as wind and, the more demonstrably ecologically harmful, biofuels.

      Call me a contrarian, but these eco-theological boondoggles will never, NEVER replace FF’s as a prime source of energy. When the Greenies admit this (not holding my breath), then perhaps the market can support alternative energy as a nice complement to existing fuel sources without endless bailouts and promoting half-baked eco-theological doomsday prophesies as justification.

      Not coincidentally, these are the same people decrying the bank bailouts and other market distortions. The disconnect is staggering.

    2. There was a second Solyndra. Off to the side, on the grassy knoll.

      1. Back and to the left. Back and to the left. Back and to the left.

  29. What baffles me is how solar advocates can possibly believe that this is going to be an isolated incident.

    Unfortunately, I think there are A LOT of people at the consumer level who honestly believe a roof-mounted solar panel will power their toaster (not to mention the oven and dryer).

  30. The future Dean Compound has no electric access now. Pulling in a line would cost about as much as current-gen solar. So, believe it or not, I will almost certainly be buying whole-house solar someday.

    And, if there’s still a tax credit for it, I will cash that check.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.