I didn’t realize the President sat in for half an inning at the All Star Game. It vaguely rings a bell, but I didn’t pay it much mind apparently.

This one from Steyn is just an addenda. I just liked it because he pointed out Obama claimed Medicare was a great success and an impending disaster all in the same speech.

“But the silver-tongued salesman sails on. Why be scared of a government health program? After all, says the president, “Medicare is a government program that works really well,” and if “we’re able to get something right like Medicare,” we should have more “confidence” about being able to do it for everyone.

On the other hand, says the president, Medicare is “unsustainable” and “running out of money.”

By the way, unlike your run-of-the-mill politician’s contradictory statements, these weren’t made a year or even a week apart, but during the same presidential speech in Portsmouth, N.H. ”

Okay, here’s one more from Noonan on how even if they win on health care, he loses because the political cost will be too high. It’s early to make this statement, but I’m going to make it anyway. If they pass health care in this kind of environment, the Republicans would stand a chance to take back the House and the Senate just on a promise to repeal what was just done.

The economy may have picked up by then, but, quite frankly, I doubt it. It’ll be up, but not by enough to overcome the feeling of a breached trust. Clinton came back from defeats by moving toward the center. Obama had the most liberal voting record in the Senate. He would have to overcome himself to do a similar thing. I don’t see it, but I didn’t see it with Clinton either.

We’ll see if he can put it back together, but he’s not used to talking specifics to Moderates and Conservatives. And when it comes to health care people will tend to look at the specifics.

William Kristol points out that Republicans can honestly say their opposition to health care is not political as they are backing the President in his dealings with Afghanistan. Pelosi’s (and several others) have been exposed (again) on this one as a hypocrite, as she starts to grow cold on the war she says was the one worth fighting.

Cap and what?


I love this article. So, Cash for Clunkers is a great success!! Marvelous!

That’s what people said when GM tried out employee pricing for the masses. Big success, except, of course, all those people who bought cars at discount prices then were out of the market for a car for years. So, future sales dropped off by more than expected, and, of course, they didn’t make any profit on the discounted sales in the first place.

Now this is the same thing, except the US taxpayer is picking up the discount, which in GM’s case means. . .I don’t know what it means, except if you work for GM or live in Detroit then it’s probably good for you. Otherwise, it’s good or the buyers. Taxpayers? I’m not so sure.

Although, I have to redo my stone walkway, and I would really appreciate it if the federal government would pay for the work.

And if this legislation is about saving Detroit, then there are probably more direct ways to do this, as six of the top 10 selling cars under this program are not made there, and only one (number 10) is made by General Motors.

So, from GM’s perspective the US government has created a subsidy to buy its competitors cars, but the author of this article thinks it’s a good thing, because GM will be able to sell cars to the rest of us via Ebay instead of through the thousand or so dealers it closed for economically murky reasons.

Because we all know that car data has been hard to get via the Internet (is that a new thing?) and having a nearby dealership to take your car for warranty service doesn’t factor into consumer purchase decisions.

Well, hopefully, the Chevy Volt will prove to be a popular car. You probably recently read it gets 230 miles per gallon, which is an amazing achievement for an electric car.

Wait a minute. If the car is electric, then what’s it use gas for? Glad you asked. The batteries are only good for 40 miles. It has a backup engine to charge the batteries beyond that.

The figure they reported today is some combination of expected city driving while mixing battery and engine use. What’s the mileage per gallon when using he engine? They didn’t say, but I’m sure it’ll be worth shelling out $40,000 for.

On the other hand, Tesla Motors, isn’t hedging its bets. It is putting all its money into the electric side of thing, producing a roadster that gets 244 miles per charge. I could see how that could be a drawback if I want to go 500 miles in a day, depending on how long it takes to recharge.

On the other hand Tesla made a profit of $1 million in July by selling 109 cars. Now, granted their selling a very expensive car, but think about that for a second.

From the press release: “The highly acclaimed Roadster — faster than a Porsche and twice as energy efficient as a Toyota Prius – is the only highway-capable electric vehicle for sale in North America or Europe. It’s the first production EV to travel more than 200 miles per charge and the first US- and EU-certified Lithium-Ion battery electric vehicle. With an estimated range of 244 miles per charge and zero tailpipe emissions, it offers supercar performance with a clean conscience.”

It sells for about $100,000.

It’ll be very interesting to see if they are able to scale up their operation.

While they’re scaling up their operation maybe they can explain how they had $20 million in revenues on sales of 109 cars being sold for $100,000 apiece. Financing?

But if I had to bet on the future of GM or Tesla, my money would be on the latter.

Oh, believe it or not, Tesla is selling their cars on the web! Wow! There goes another of GM’s competitive advantages.


So, a snarky commentary on how Obama has sidelined Clinton as Secretary of State. He gets the good stuff, relegating her to second-rate tasks.

Then she completely blows it! and isn’t she supposed to dress up for these things?