"WASHINGTON (AP) - The Obama administration is refusing to release
government records on its "cash-for-clunkers" rebate program that
would substantiate—or undercut—White House claims of the program's
success, even as the president presses the Senate for a quick vote for
$2 billion to boost car sales.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said Sunday the government would
release electronic records about the program, and President Barack
Obama has pledged greater transparency for his administration. But the
Transportation Department, which has collected details about 157,000
rebate requests, won't release sales data that dealers provided
showing how much U.S. car manufacturers are benefiting from the $1
billion initially pumped into the program."

----

"LaHood, for example, promotes the fact that the Ford Focus so far is
at the top of the list of new cars purchased under the program. But
the limited information released so far shows most buyers are not
picking Ford, Chrysler or General Motors vehicles, and six of the top
10 vehicles purchased are Honda, Toyota and Hyundai."

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

---------

Oh oh.

Look for the UAW label, then go out and buy something without it.

Wizard of Woodstock wrote:
"WASHINGTON (AP) - The Obama administration is refusing to release
government records on its "cash-for-clunkers" rebate program that
would substantiate—or undercut—White House claims of the program's
success, even as the president presses the Senate for a quick vote for
$2 billion to boost car sales.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said Sunday the government would
release electronic records about the program, and President Barack
Obama has pledged greater transparency for his administration. But the
Transportation Department, which has collected details about 157,000
rebate requests, won't release sales data that dealers provided
showing how much U.S. car manufacturers are benefiting from the $1
billion initially pumped into the program."

----

"LaHood, for example, promotes the fact that the Ford Focus so far is
at the top of the list of new cars purchased under the program. But
the limited information released so far shows most buyers are not
picking Ford, Chrysler or General Motors vehicles, and six of the top
10 vehicles purchased are Honda, Toyota and Hyundai."

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

---------

Oh oh.

Look for the UAW label, then go out and buy something without it.

Another of Barry's brainstorms not going exactly as planned. Oh dear!

wrote:
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 14:23:16 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock
wrote:

"WASHINGTON (AP) - The Obama administration is refusing to release
government records on its "cash-for-clunkers" rebate program that
would substantiate—or undercut—White House claims of the program's
success, even as the president presses the Senate for a quick vote for
$2 billion to boost car sales.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said Sunday the government would
release electronic records about the program, and President Barack
Obama has pledged greater transparency for his administration. But the
Transportation Department, which has collected details about 157,000
rebate requests, won't release sales data that dealers provided
showing how much U.S. car manufacturers are benefiting from the $1
billion initially pumped into the program."

----

"LaHood, for example, promotes the fact that the Ford Focus so far is
at the top of the list of new cars purchased under the program. But
the limited information released so far shows most buyers are not
picking Ford, Chrysler or General Motors vehicles, and six of the top
10 vehicles purchased are Honda, Toyota and Hyundai."

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

---------

Oh oh.

Look for the UAW label, then go out and buy something without it.

I believe they actually got the 250k cars the program funded. My
dealer did 30 in 2 weeks (they cheated and started making the deals
shortly after the program passed) .
We traded the old F150 for a Lincoln MKX (SUV). It qualified for the
$4500.
By last week one scrap yard here had already shredded 60 clunkers,
including one 480SEL. I am shocked they didn't take all the body parts
and expensive doo dads off. The only thing that really needs to be
destroyed is the engine and the VIN tag.


Just another example of Tom jumping to whatever conclusions support his
preconceived notions, without having to wait for facts.

H the K wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 14:23:16 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock
wrote:

"WASHINGTON (AP) - The Obama administration is refusing to release
government records on its "cash-for-clunkers" rebate program that
would substantiate—or undercut—White House claims of the program's
success, even as the president presses the Senate for a quick vote for
$2 billion to boost car sales.
Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said Sunday the government would
release electronic records about the program, and President Barack
Obama has pledged greater transparency for his administration. But the
Transportation Department, which has collected details about 157,000
rebate requests, won't release sales data that dealers provided
showing how much U.S. car manufacturers are benefiting from the $1
billion initially pumped into the program."

----

"LaHood, for example, promotes the fact that the Ford Focus so far is
at the top of the list of new cars purchased under the program. But
the limited information released so far shows most buyers are not
picking Ford, Chrysler or General Motors vehicles, and six of the top
10 vehicles purchased are Honda, Toyota and Hyundai."

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

---------
Oh oh.

Look for the UAW label, then go out and buy something without it.

I believe they actually got the 250k cars the program funded. My
dealer did 30 in 2 weeks (they cheated and started making the deals
shortly after the program passed) . We traded the old F150 for a
Lincoln MKX (SUV). It qualified for the
$4500.
By last week one scrap yard here had already shredded 60 clunkers,
including one 480SEL. I am shocked they didn't take all the body parts
and expensive doo dads off. The only thing that really needs to be
destroyed is the engine and the VIN tag.


Just another example of Tom jumping to whatever conclusions support his
preconceived notions, without having to wait for facts.


I heard today the they were putting Sodium silicate into the engines of
the "clunkers". It seems that the silica could be removed after getting
credit by using Hydroflouric acid, which dissolves silica assuming no
parts were bent or broken

Of course that would be after you had your rebate money.

On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:51:40 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

I heard today the they were putting Sodium silicate into the engines of
the "clunkers". It seems that the silica could be removed after getting
credit by using Hydroflouric acid, which dissolves silica assuming no
parts were bent or broken

You do understand that sodium silicate is highly soluble in plain
water?

Casady

Richard Casady wrote:
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:51:40 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

I heard today the they were putting Sodium silicate into the engines of
the "clunkers". It seems that the silica could be removed after getting
credit by using Hydroflouric acid, which dissolves silica assuming no
parts were bent or broken

You do understand that sodium silicate is highly soluble in plain
water?

Casady
If it remained water soluble it could be flushed out. The heat from the
engine changes it.

Richard Casady wrote:
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:51:40 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

I heard today the they were putting Sodium silicate into the engines of
the "clunkers". It seems that the silica could be removed after getting
credit by using Hydroflouric acid, which dissolves silica assuming no
parts were bent or broken

You do understand that sodium silicate is highly soluble in plain
water?

Casady

But after they add the sodium silicate they run the engine until it seizes.

On Aug 5, 11:19*am, NotNow wrote:
Richard Casady wrote:
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:51:40 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

I heard today the they were putting Sodium silicate into the engines of
the "clunkers". *It seems that the silica could be removed after getting
credit by using Hydroflouric acid, which dissolves silica assuming no
parts were bent or broken

You do understand that sodium silicate is highly soluble in plain
water?

Casady

But after they add the sodium silicate they run the engine until it seizes.

What a brain dead stupid idea Cash For Clunkers has been. Can we do
the same for our clunker politicians, we wouldnt even have to do
anything to make sure the Dems are brain dead.

Frogwatch wrote:
On Aug 5, 11:19 am, NotNow wrote:
Richard Casady wrote:
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:51:40 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:
I heard today the they were putting Sodium silicate into the engines of
the "clunkers". It seems that the silica could be removed after getting
credit by using Hydroflouric acid, which dissolves silica assuming no
parts were bent or broken
You do understand that sodium silicate is highly soluble in plain
water?
Casady
But after they add the sodium silicate they run the engine until it seizes.

What a brain dead stupid idea Cash For Clunkers has been. Can we do
the same for our clunker politicians, we wouldnt even have to do
anything to make sure the Dems are brain dead.

Brain dead? You seem to have the franchise on brain dead ideas around here.

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 12:53:31 -0400, H the K
wrote:

Frogwatch wrote:
On Aug 5, 11:19 am, NotNow wrote:
Richard Casady wrote:
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:51:40 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:
I heard today the they were putting Sodium silicate into the engines of
the "clunkers". It seems that the silica could be removed after getting
credit by using Hydroflouric acid, which dissolves silica assuming no
parts were bent or broken
You do understand that sodium silicate is highly soluble in plain
water?
Casady
But after they add the sodium silicate they run the engine until it seizes.

What a brain dead stupid idea Cash For Clunkers has been. Can we do
the same for our clunker politicians, we wouldnt even have to do
anything to make sure the Dems are brain dead.

Brain dead? You seem to have the franchise on brain dead ideas around here.

It is 'brain dead' only if you think it was done for any reason other
than to get votes. If the purpose was to help the economy, a $4500
reduction in taxes would do much more.
--

John H