Both are great examples of doing it wrong.
You do realize the disastrous ethanol subsidies were expanded during the Bush years, right? There's a lot of blame to go around for everyone on Capitol Hill.
I don't see a problem with the kind of research Obama wants to fund, but the money should go to universities producing publicly available research.
My problem is that Solyndra and Tesla are being held to a different standard altogether when it comes to Government spending. I am sick and tired of people complaining about these companies getting loan guarantees. Instead of looking at these loans in isolation they should look at the percentage of successful loans/guarantees made by the DoE. When you look at it from that perspective, money spent by DoE is the best bang for buck the Govt has got. We will never have a perfect scenario for Government spending. We should encourage innovation wherever it is happening be it a private company or a public entity as long as it fits in the overall strategy of moving the country forward. Upside to a successful Tesla cannot be valued in just dollars.
I totally look at the loans in isolation.
I ask: Should the government be involved in the free market by attempting to pick investments in order to guide growth in certain sectors of the economy?
My answer is: No. The Constitution does not allow for the government to perform this type of activity. Thus, the States did not agree to allow the Federal government to perform this type of activity. Due to the special place, power, and privilege of the Federal government - preventing overreach should be a prime concern for all citizens. If the citizenry decides to fundamentally and explicitly change the role of the Federal government, the Constitution should be amended to support that new role.