Regulation

Anthony Weiner: When It Comes to Regulations, Tesla and Other Tech Companies Should Shut Up and Take It

|

maybe he had a good reason!
TMZ

Former Democrat Congressman and New York City mayoral candidate Anthony Weiner has a new column at Business Insider, and for his first column he decided to defend Gov. Chris Christie (R-N.J.). He tells readers it might be surprising that he's decided to defend a "conservative" in his first column. It shouldn't be.

Christie may consider himself a conservative, but like Weiner he often sees government as the solution to, not the cause of, various problems. This time, Weiner thinks Christie was right about cracking down on direct sales of electric cars by Tesla. He writes that the regulations that prevent direct sales are a good idea, probably, but he's not confident he knows why:

Why would you want to have laws that require a car be purchased through a local dealer?  Perhaps to protect a purchaser's rights to easily enforce the warranty. To ensure the state's ability to enforce the reams of unique state legal requirements that govern automobile sales, service and even disposal maybe. Or, it might just be a run-of-the-mill instinct for local rather than federal regulations to govern what, for many Americans, is the biggest purchase of their lives. You may not agree with these conclusions, but these are longstanding laws and there was a robust back-and-forth about them well before Tesla drove onto the scene.

Perhaps, maybe, might. Weiner is willing to provide a vigorous defense of regulations whose purpose he can't identify with certainty. Perhaps Weiner is a slimeball. Maybe. He might be. To his credit, Weiner admits he received donations from car dealers as a politician, but then explains how lobbyists lobby about regulations in one of the most backward ways I've seen:

You can't swing a dead cat in Washington or any of the 50 state capitals without hitting a lobbyist pitching the idea some regulation is overreaching, unnecessary, or stifling of competition.

The statement is just as, if not more true from the other direction: You can't swing a dead cat in any capital without hitting a lobbyist pitching the idea some new regulation is needed (often to stifle his employer's competition).

Weiner's presumption to trust that regulations are there for a reason is backward too. Everything he listed as a possible reason for the regulations that prohibit direct Tesla sales—protecting warranties and enforcing legal requirements on auto sales, service, and disposal—can be just as easily imposed on and satisfied by Tesla's direct sales division. It gets better. Weiner continues:

Along with Tesla, companies like Uber and AirBnB, are trying to do more than upset the established entities in their markets. They're all building businesses on an even tougher bet—that they can get rule makers and legislators to throw out the laws that those same people wrote. In this respect, the Tesla fight is noteworthy only in that it's a cool car.

Like with Uber and AirBnB, Weiner, it's also noteworthy that the fights are over rules and laws pushed not in the interest of safety, or good governance, or whatever mumbo jumbo is used to justify regulations, but because of an industry's desire to stifle competition, and the government's desire to act like a hit man. Back to Weiner's column:

Reasonable people may think regulations that get in the way of tech companies are all just bad laws. In Tesla's case, some might consider bans on direct auto sales to be part of a protectionist regime set up by a powerful lobby—neighborhood car dealers—and unchallenged by a lazy industry that didn't want to antagonize its sales force. Still, dismissing all existing regulations out of hand without recognizing them as the product of reasoning and careful consideration isn't the answer.

I suppose it takes the kind of tolerance for hypocrisy and lack of self-awareness that politicians have to have to succeed to perform the kind of mental and rhetorical gymnastics Weiner has here. He offers nothing to dispel the idea that the ban Tesla is suffering from was "part of a protectionist regime set up by… car dealers," but nevertheless suggests that regulations still be assumed to have been the product of reasoning and consideration. Why? Liberals like Weiner often complain about the influence of money in politics but stop short of identifying the root problem as the power of government.

When individuals, groups, or even companies support political candidates with money, they are exercising their right to free speech. That money, or straight up bribes, can only lead to corruption when the government has the power to be corrupt. It wouldn't matter how much money car dealers, or Tesla for that matter, gave politicians if their elected offices didn't have the power to write rules that protect car dealers from competition or that send taxpayer money to Tesla, or even that end up enriching the politicians themselves. Money, corporate or otherwise, doesn't corrupt politicians. Their ability to write rules that pick winners and losers and distort entire industries and markets does. And the idea that every law and regulation is "probably" there for a good reason abets that ability.

NEXT: Friday A/V Club: Footage from the Communist Mirror-Universe

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 Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. When you have even less class than politicians in New York, you really need to keep your mouth shut unless you like the taste of your own foot.

    Go away Weiner.

  2. Weather it is right or wrong everything we do is for your betterment.

  3. Fucking morons. We want to give total power to fucking morons. Why?

    1. Because we’re fucking morons? Especially you.

        1. Be nice to ProL, he’s still recovering from the shock of finding a planet orbiting outside the solar system.

          1. Don’t you understand? Nothing is outside the solar system.

            1. Except maybe that Malaysia Airlines plane.

              -CNN talking head

              1. That’s only because it was transported there by that black hole.

      1. That’s unkind. Just because she married Pro L doesn’t make her a moron.

        1. No, but she does cohabitate with him in Florida.

          1. I can’t really argue with that.

            I’m sorry Pro L…

          2. Oh, yeah, Florida sucks. Don’t move here.

  4. Weiner is right but for the wrong reasons. Tesla and other tech companies have been bankrolling Progs for years. It is a bit rich for them to now come and whine about how regulations are hurting their business. Fuck them. They have happily supported candidates who have been screwing the rest of us with regulations. How dare they now complain that regulations are affecting them.

    1. In Tesla’s case they are complaining about state/local regulations where most of the obnoxious regulations are.

      1. In Tesla’s case they have bankrolled the California Democratic party, which has passed a hell of a lot more regulations than this one. They want Progressive government, good for them. But that means they forfeit the right to complain when they actually get such government.

        Tesla is a welfare queen of a company that makes a glorified golf cart only a poser idiot would buy. They only exist because of big government graft and corruption. They have no right to complain about New Jersey car dealerships getting their share of graft and corruption.

        1. Tesla is a welfare queen of a company that makes a glorified golf cart only a poser idiot would buy

          John is being too kind to Tesla.

          The car is a rolling hazardous waste site that has a bad habit of catching fire.

          1. That too. Gee, maybe battery powered cars are a bad idea.

            1. One of my coworkers tells me his son-in-law is a paramedic. If they come to the scene of an auto accident and see a Prius leaking fluids, they call hazmat and wait. They will let you die waiting for the guys in rubber suits to show up.

              1. Amazing. But those batteries are full of really nasty shit. How people who claim to care about the environment could think it is a good idea to drive a car full of all sorts of hazardous chemicals that are both toxic to manufacture and dispose of so that they can emit a marginally less amount of CO2 is just beyond me.

                Buying a hybrid is completely idiotic. You are adding all of that weight and expense and complexity to gain virtually nothing. Any compact car with an efficient engine will use less gas than a Prius, and have less shit to break and damage the environment less in its production.

                Using hybrid technology and electric motors to assist a gasoline engine is an interesting idea in high performance cars since electric motors have huge amounts of instant torque. Using such a system in an every day car is idiotic.

                1. Existing dual-drive hybrids are dumb engineering (racing cars excepted).

                  More rational is an electric drive car that has a gasoline generator to replenish the batteries.

                  But yeah. Considering overall impact to the environment, 500 lbs of lithium-ion batteries that cannot last as long as the body of the car (and therefore must be replaced during the life of the car) is bad environmental engineering.

                  1. Yeah, Kinneth, an electric car with a gasoline generator is just a gasoline version of a diesel electric motor. They have been using those in trains for decades. It is interesting that they haven’t done the same with big trucks. They use electric motors in trains because of the torque. That torque would be awfully useful in a big truck or a tractor.

                    1. John,
                      I’m betting that they’d love to if they could package it within the existing regs.

                    2. Catapillar.

                    3. “Catapillar.”
                      Aren’t those diesel/hydraulic?

                    4. They use electric motors in trains because of the torque. That torque would be awfully useful in a big truck or a tractor.

                      Friction (and load) are less relevant on steel rails. Take a diesel truck that can tow 10 tons 450 mi., convert it to diesel-electric with the same diesel engine and you can now tow 8 tons 300 mi.

                      It’s been used in submarines since before WWII (for the same reason, push-button torque), AFAIK before locomotives. When nuclear came around, they dumped the batteries and electric motors and kept the diesel engines as backups.

                2. Using hybrid technology and electric motors to assist a gasoline engine is an interesting idea in high performance cars since electric motors have huge amounts of instant torque.

                  Top Gear testing the Porsche 918. Because, car pron…

                3. This is a big problem of the obsession with CO2 emissions (and specifically tail pipe emissions). It makes people overlook actual toxic pollution that causes immediate problems. The Prius is great because it has less emissions (which isn’t really even true compared to an efficient compact car). No further thought required.

                  1. You must be forgetting about the amount of smug that is released every time a person pulls their Prius up next to a truck or SUV.

                4. Any compact car with an efficient engine will use less gas than a Prius

                  Having briefly owned a Prius, I don’t agree with this. I routinely averaged 45 on the highway, 50 in the city, 47 mixed. The only ones I’ve ever come close to that hitting that in were the late 80s-early 90s econoboxes–and they were far lighter and less efficient than today’s engines. I currently drive a Civic and hit 38 mpg max on the highway, 28 in the city. My wife’s old Yaris got about 42 on the highway, but that’s a tiny-ass coupe that SHOULD get over 40 mpgs. That a Prius can get the mileage it does given the weight issues is a testament to its hybrid powerplant. It wouldn’t be the best-selling hybrid if it wasn’t a quality vehicle.

                  That said, you’re exactly right about the complexity issues surrounding hybrids. Ultimately, whatever you save in gas really doesn’t offset the issues involved in repairing problems when they arise. That’s one reason that I’m reluctant to buy a truck, even though I want one BADLY. The ones they’re building these days have a lot of cool features, but they’re wildly complex because they’re trying to fit into the CAFE mandates. You used to be able to do a lot of work on your own vehicle, but all the electronics and doodads they put on them now pretty much disqualifies people from doing anything other than the most mundane tasks.

        2. Tesla is a welfare queen of a company that makes a glorified golf cart only a poser idiot would buy.

          Actually, while I’ve generally been skeptical about electric cars, Tesla seems to make a pretty nice one. Not that I’ll be buying one anytime soon.

          And while it’s true that they’re a welfare queen, it’s also true that it takes two to tango. If the government wasn’t paying it, Tesla wouldn’t be pocketing it.

          As the old saying goes, “If they’re gonna throw it in your lap, put it in your pocket”.

          1. Yes, I blame the government for giving them the welfare. And Telsas look cool, but they are as Kenneth points out above rolling hazardous waste sites and make up for it by catching on fire.

            1. Tesla made the news today. They announced they are going to replace the strike plate on the bottom of the vehicle so they won’t be as likely to catch fire in normal driving conditions. Won’t solve anything if someone has an accident and drives off the freeway at high speeds or gets smash by a dump truck.

          2. Depending on price, the Model S has driving range of between 208 and 265 miles. A full charge takes about six hours from an ordinary 240 volt outlet, according to Tesla.

            That is all.

            1. So I am paying a fortune for a car with batteries that will wear out and cost me a fortune to replace and is only good if I plan to drive it less than 208 miles and am willing to charge it six hours between uses.

              You are not making your case. For the price of a Tesla I can buy and put gas in a car that will work better, last longer and be just as fun to drive.

              1. You thought that was a defense of Tesla?

                I put a spare fuel tank in my truck so I can go 1000 miles between fill ups. And in 10 minutes I can drive another 1000 miles.

                I wouldn’t own a vehicle that required 6 hours to recharge even if it got 2008 miles per charge.

                1. My mistake Francisco. I was being a bit dense.

                2. Hell, I would if it were priced anything close to current electrics. A month’s worth of charge in six hours at $0.095 per kilowatt hour?

            2. But if they can get the taxpayers to cover the capital and electric bills for their ‘supercharger’ stations, you can go 100 miles with only a 30 minute wait for the next 100 miles!

            3. Drive for four hours, charge for six. That’s efficient.

      2. Palin’s Buttplug|3.28.14 @ 10:59AM|#
        “In Tesla’s case they are complaining about state/local regulations where most of the obnoxious regulations are.”

        Stuff your sophistry up your ass.

  5. You know who else should shut up and ta… oh, never mind.

  6. What a loathsome piece of shit.

    These regulations are perfectly reasonable. How do we know they’re reasonable? Well, because they’re regulations, of course. Plus, they’ve been around for a long time and stuff. A lot longer than that awful Constitution thingy that Teathuglicans are always going on about.

    1. Oh, almost forgot: Fuck Tesla. They deserve Anthony Weiner.

  7. Why would you want to have laws that require a car be purchased through a local dealer? * * * To ensure the state’s ability to enforce the reams of unique state legal requirements that govern automobile sales, service and even disposal maybe.

    You spin me right round, baby, right round, like that statist “logic,” right round round round.

    1. Seriously, why does any of that require a middle-man? Is it theoretically impossible for a manufacturer to work directly with the state government without a local dealer as an intermediary?

  8. “enforce the warranty”

    That’s what a dealer does? I thought that was what I was doing when I demand they fix the damn thing.

    1. Warranties can be administered by anyone that Tesla cares to use, provided that everything is disclosed properly. What consumers need are local options for fixing the car, not dealers.

      1. Weiner, like most Progs is pig ignorant and has no clue how the world actually works. All a warranty is is insurance against a break down. A company that offers a warranty is just insuring their own products. Collision insurance companies don’t own body shops. They hire private shops to do the work. After market warranty services don’t own dealers. Tesla could do the same thing.

        1. Dealers are just retailers, after all. Usually, retailers engage third parties if they service warranties at all or, probably more commonly, they tell the consumer to call the manufacturer to service its warranty.

          1. Cars are a bit different in that they are expensive and not disposable. So people actually fix them. But yeah, people fix washing machines too. And washing machines have warranties. Yet, plenty of appliance companies don’t have dedicated dealers. It is a completely stupid point.

            1. Cars aren’t disposable? Somebody ought to let Mopar know that.

              1. All of the Big 3 thought that cars were only expected to last 5 years. They didn’t count on the Japanese coming along or people deciding the Detroit pre smog regulation cars would be collectable.

                1. My 12-year-old Xterra with 140k runs and drives smoother than any 5-yr-old sedan from the Big 3.

                  1. Cars really of any make today last an amazingly long time. As recently as the 1940s, it was pretty much expected that you would have to rebuild an engine every 20,000 miles or so. Things got better in the 50s and 60s. Those old motors are very simple and if properly maintained will run 100,000 miles.

                    Today though, any engine should run 150K+ with proper maintenance. My wife works with a woman who has an old Ford Taurus. It has over 400,0000 miles on it without a rebuild and it still doesn’t burn oil. She calls it “Big Blue”. I have to admit, I kind of love Big Blue. You have to respect any car that can go 400,000 miles.

                    1. You have to respect any car that can go 400,000 miles.

                      Yeah, but there’s a difference between respect and admiration 😉

                      The last Big 3 auto I owned was a late 80’s Mustang. I still haven’t forgiven Ford for that one. But I absolutely respect the hell of them for telling the Feds to fuck off and not taking a bailout.

                    2. Kinnath,

                      The new Fords are a lot better than what they made in the 1980s. Really, most cars in the 1980s sucked. The problem was that the old technology didn’t work well when you controlled emissions. Cadillitic converters alone didn’t reduce emissions enough. So the car companies detuned their engines so they used less gas and thus put out lower emissions. That created all kinds of problems for the engines. They engines were under powered and generally ran like shit compared to the old pre-1973 ones.

                      It wasn’t until the mid 1990s when they finally came up with good fuel injection and computerized control that cars were able to work properly while meeting emission standards. There are very few cars made between 1973 and around 1998 that would even consider owning. There are a few good ones. But most of them sucked.

                    3. I understand that Ford has gotten dramatically better since then (everyone has, but Ford in particular).

                      But I was also driving Subarus from the 80s that had outstanding gas mileage and performance and on-demand 4-wheel drive at the same time Ford, GM, and Chrysler where pushing shit out onto the roads.

                      And still I haven’t seen any Big 3 vehicle that would get me to change from the Subarus and Nissans I’ve been driving for the last 16 years and will probably buy new again this summer or fall.

                    4. Kinneth,

                      I would say the Ford Fusion and Focus are great cars. Really though, cars have gotten so much better that what model you own is really up to what you like. Even the least reliable car made today is probably better than even your Nissan from back in the 1980s. The worst cars for “reliability” are always complex fiddly cars like Jags and Range Rovers that are full of electronics. Those cars tend to have a lot of small ankle biter problems that push them to the bottom end of the reliability ratings. But even those cars’ drive trains and major parts rarely go. They are by the standards of 20 years ago wonderfully reliable cars. Sure, the ones at the top of the ratings are even more reliable. But the difference between the top and the bottom is a lot smaller than it used to be. It used to be the top was some Suburu that ran 200,000 miles without a rebuild and the bottom was some GM car that had a 20% catastrophic engine failure rate in the first 50,000 miles. Now that gap is nowhere near as wide.

                    5. Now that gap is nowhere near as wide.

                      Very true. So that just leaves the driving experience.

                      The only Big 3 autos I have driven in the last 10 years have been rental cars, and I have hated everyone of them. It such a relief to walk out to the pick up lot and see a Nissan instead of a Ford at the Hertz location.

                      I will note that Ford makes awesome cars in Europe. An I always enjoy the rentals that I get there. So it’s down to American engineering that sucks, because the manufacturing is catching up to global standards.

                    6. It is Kinnath. I will defend the American auto industry. I think they make a better car than people realize and the Japanese cars are not as bomb proof as a lot of people think. No car is perfect and even Toyotas shoot a rod sometimes.

                      That said, I own two German cars. I bought them both because I just loved the driving experience and loved both cars not because I was betting on them being the most reliable.

                      That said, my Merc that I have had for over six years and 70,000 miles now has been a wonderfully reliable car. It has only had one significant issue, one of the front bearings went. But I blame that on the bad roads more than the car.

                      I really think people have issues with cars because they either don’t maintain them properly or don’t drive them enough. A lot of high end sports cars get tagged as being unreliable. But when you talk to the owners of the cars you find all kinds of people who use them as daily drivers for years and think they are great. It seems the people who have the worst luck are the ones who stick their cars in the garage and only drive them on special occasions. Cars don’t take well to not being used.

                    7. I will defend the American auto industry.

                      American workers producing Japanese nameplate vehicles have proven that labor is not the problem.

                      American engineers continue to lead the world in innovation in many industries.

                      The problems have been in the boardrooms of the Big 3. And so far Ford is the only one that has really turned things around. And Ford is the only one that I respect at this time.

                    8. No Kinnath,

                      Labor is not the problem. But Japanese cars are not perfect and American cars are not as bad as they are made out to be. That is all I am saying.

                      Don’t get me started on the lunacy of GM and Chrysler and all of the horrible cars they have made. The most frustrating thing is both of them can when they choose to still make a great car. Yet, they still manage to make so many bad ones. I just don’t get it.

                    9. We are violently agreeing again John.

                      I’m off to lunch.

                    10. There are very few cars made between 1973 and around 1998 that would even consider owning. There are a few good ones. But most of them sucked.

                      Some of the vehicles from the late 70s to early 90s had a certain charm despite the headaches, like the Ford LTD land yachts or the first Miatas. But you’re right, most of them were shit because they hadn’t quite figured out how to properly mate performance with decent mileage until roughly the late 90s–and at that time, gas was super cheap and SUVs were all the rage.

                      Now the preferences have shifted to trucks, crossovers, and sedans where even the “compacts” are damn near the same size as the 80s full-sizers. I drove up on an early 90s Civic the other day and it looked like a toy car next to my own late-model version.

              2. Bah, my Cummins ram is damn near invincible.

                1. It was interesting when Dodge Ram became Ram. Indicates the “dodge” brand was so polluted that it was hurting the business that they’re actually very good at.

                  1. It was interesting when Dodge Ram became Ram. Indicates the “dodge” brand was so polluted that it was hurting the business that they’re actually very good at.

                    Honestly, if it wasn’t for Cummins, Dodge probably would have left the truck business 15 years ago. Those engines are damn near bulletproof and have given Rams a certain air of durability that isn’t totally deserved.

                2. Dinkster,

                  I love diesel engines. They are just amazing. They run cool and never die. And unlike a gasoline engine, which will basically die if you don’t use it, you can leave a diesel engine sitting in a field for five years, walk out, put a new battery on it and it will turn right over.

  9. The level of derpitude in this makes me wonder if Weiner is the same as our Tony troll.

    1. Tony is a shortened form of Anthony. I think you may be onto something.

  10. Please stop swinging dead cats at me. I just try to make sure my clients know what the rules. FWIW, it’s one of the reason my politics are the way they are.

  11. Ahhhh, Anthony Weiner. I’ll be in my bunk for the next hour.

  12. The biggest loser in all this?

    Business Insider

    1. Right? The editor/publisher needs to look at this article and re-evaluate their hiring of Weener. The “business” aspect is spurious at best. Being a politician, he got the “insider” part right. Expect more in the future.

    2. Right? The editor/publisher needs to look at this article and re-evaluate their hiring of Weener. The “business” aspect is spurious at best. Being a politician, he got the “insider” part right. Expect more in the future.

      1. You should recall that the editor/publisher of Business Insider is Henry Blodget – who got permanently kicked out of a career requiring public trust in your ethical integrity for openly bragging about how he recommended garbage stocks to investors in order to juice investment-banking deals and receive sweet kickbacks.

        in other words, he’s almost as classy as a politician

        Blodget is a slimeball. Anybody who’s ever worked as an analyst has had to deal with the damage he did to the credibility of the job and the layers of bullshit regulations that were imposed in his departure to attempt to ensure no other Scumbag ever did the same as him again.

        *I note: there’s far more incentive and motive to ‘do things right’ when the government isn’t actively destroying that incentive and creating artificial ways to game the system.

        why are car dealerships so important? They rely on regulations to exist, and therefore are strong political constituents. (see: Beer distributors) Yet your OWS idiots somehow think making banks et al into extensions of government would be the ‘solution’. They always sell these crony relationships to the public as a means of “protecting” the consumer. (From someone selling them a cheaper car with less red tape, presumably)

  13. Perhaps Weiner is a slimeball.

    Perhaps 1 + 1 = 2.

  14. Perhaps Weiner is a slimeball.

    Perhaps?

    Hedging!

  15. To ensure the state’s ability to enforce the reams of unique state legal requirements that govern automobile sales, service and even disposal maybe. Or, it might just be a run-of-the-mill instinct for local rather than federal regulations to govern what, for many Americans, is the biggest purchase of their lives.

    I notice there is no question of whether those reams of legal requirements and state regulations are good or even necessary.

    You may not agree with these conclusions, but these are longstanding laws and there was a robust back-and-forth about them well before Tesla drove onto the scene.

    LAW OF THE LAND!

  16. “he often sees government as the solution to, not the cause of, various problems”

    I thought alcohol was the solution to various problems? Or maybe it was the cause…

    1. Those two things are not mutually exclusive.

  17. regulations are great. weiner out.

    1. Also, he needs to package his “argument” more briefly.

      1. He’s too cocky for that.

      2. He’s just thinking outside of the boxer

  18. You’re either for technological innovation and a dynamic economy or you’re with Anthony Weiner. Make a choice.

  19. Well, now I guess we know for sure which head’s doing all the thinking there.

  20. Will the dealers be responsible for suing Tesla when the idiots who bought them find out their $100k whizbang is worth just about NOTHING after five years?

    1. Did you see the Top Gear review of Tesla? If not, look it up. It’s hilarious.

      1. And Tesla lost the lawsuit!…I think.

  21. Psychologically, Wiener is an example of untethered high self-esteem. His mommy told him that everything he did was fabulous and he still believes it.

  22. “Money, corporate or otherwise, doesn’t corrupt politicians. Their ability to write rules that pick winners and losers and distort entire industries and markets does.”
    I would argue it is the combo of money and power. Money or power corrupt, together, they corrupt absolutely (with apologies to Lord Acton).

    1. 28th Amendment:

      Congress shall make no law benefitting one individual or group over another.

      (Think that one through)

  23. He writes that the regulations that prevent direct sales are a good idea, probably, but he’s not confident he knows why:

    This is the attitude of most progressives. They are so obsessed with their hatred of liberty that they react to any criticism of a government regulation with the assumption that there must be a good reason for it, even if they have no idea what exactly that is.

    1. Hazel, liberty scares the living shit out of most people. Either they are deathly afraid of taking responsibility for themselves, or they need a system to game because they can’t make it on their own merit.

  24. BTW, Tesla gets the velvet-glove treatment from the feds:

    “Feds close investigation of Tesla battery fires”
    […]
    “The move is not a recall, a Tesla spokeswoman said.”
    http://www.sfgate.com/news/sci…..356881.php

    Toyota, take note: Contributions to D’s might mean no fines for doing nothing wrong.

  25. You can’t swing a Weiner in Washington without hitting a lobbyist.

    1. Would that be a tumescent or a flaccid Weiner?

  26. Or, it might just be a run-of-the-mill instinct for local rather than federal regulations to govern what, for many Americans, is the biggest purchase of their lives

    If a car is going to be the biggest purchase of your life, you should really reconsider the car you’re going to buy.

    1. Or maybe many Americans don’t ever buy a house.

      1. The point is that if the biggest purchase you’re going to make is a car, that car shouldn’t be a Tesla given its cost and absurd inefficiencies.

  27. Is it just me, or does Carlos Danger appear to be the embodiment of every rotten characteristic possible in a politician or political pundit? Was he assembled from various spare parts that were supposed to go to the worst of all the Top Men in the country? I mean the guy doesn’t have one single fucking redeeming quality.

    1. He does have one redeeming quality: he pretty much vindicates Ayn Rand’s caricatures of the political class.

  28. Wiener and Leland Yee should be made poster-children of the “We know what’s best for you”-Democratic Party

  29. I like how a figure once loved by conservatives like Chris Christie now becomes a ‘prog’ since he gotten on their bad side. Christie is part of a long tradition of Northeastern conservatives who are moderate-liberal on some social issues while being ‘good government’, law and order, and ‘fiscally conservative.’ That is how he has run and governed. But he hugs Obama and attacks Rand Paul and suddenly he is a ‘prog.’ Sheesh.

    1. People got excited early in his governorship because he made some good noises about pushing back public sector unions.

    2. Northeastern Republicans were the original Progressives. TR was a Republican in case you have forgotten.

      There is nothing “consrevative” about Christie. The only reason he looks conservative is because actual liberals have gotten so nuts.

      What has Christie ever done that could be described as “conservative”? All I can see is beating up on a few teachers and pointing out that the State doesn’t print its own money and is going to go broke if it doesn’t make some effort to control its spending.

      That doesn’t make Christie conservative. It makes him sane and the liberals who think he is some kind of crazy conservative nuts.

      1. Christie is virtually indistinguishable from Guliani. Is Rudy a progressive?

        1. Guiliani never supported the tax rates that Christie does. Beyond that, it depends on how you define Progressive.

          There are degrees of everything. And just because someone is not a conservative doens’t mean they are necessarily a progressive or that even if they are all Progressives or Conservatives are the same.

          Whatever you want to call Christie or Guiliani, they are not anything like most people who call themselves “conservative”. You just throw the tag on Christie because you want to use Christie’s commitment to big government as a way to slander all conservatives as hypocrites.

          Christie and Guiliani are both big government Northeastern Republicans. Their existence says nothing beyond that.

    3. Wow, Bo, you’re so smart and politically asute. I wish we were all as Objectively minded as You.

    4. He’s not suddenly anything. I’ve never particularly liked him, but the apex of his popularity was when he fought the union, which was years ago. It’s been downhill ever since. He’s certainly no conservative, but he’s even more certainly not remotely libertarian.

      He’s got no chance at the nomination now, anyway, so it’s much ado about nothing.


      1. Pro Libertate|3.28.14 @ 1:00PM|#

        He’s got no chance at the nomination now, anyway, so it’s much ado about nothing.”

        Which is exactly why dems would be so happy to see him run for president.

        1. Sure, that would be a win-win for them. If they beat him, then they win, and if he wins, they win. I think most Republicans recognize that.

    5. I think Christie is a centrist/moderate (and I don’t mean that in a good way). I wouldn’t really describe him as a conservative or a progressive. He may lean either way, depending on the issue.

      1. Christie is a ‘Scumbag’. What party he claims affiliation with is sort of meaningless.

        1. Really, they should have a national party all of their own.

  30. Christie may consider himself a conservative, but like Weiner he often sees government as the solution to, not the cause of, various problems.

    Conservatives frequently see government as the solution to various problems.

    1. Vague comment is vague

      1. Gilmore really hates any criticism of conservatives, doesn’t he?

        1. Mendacious cunt is mendacious

      2. But not untrue.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.