backtop


Print 172 comment(s) - last by Dan Banana.. on Feb 28 at 8:11 PM

Bob Lutz has had enough of the Volt flaming

Bob Lutz has never been one to back down from a fight. The former Marine has served at a number of car companies over the decades including General Motors, BMW, Ford, and Chrysler. Most recently, Lutz served at GM's Vice Chairman for Special Advisor Design and Global Product Development.
 
When it comes to hardcore "car guys" in the auto industry, there aren't many as rabid as Lutz. In recent years, Lutz is responsible for spearheading the development of enthusiast-oriented vehicles like the fifth-generation Chevrolet Camaro, Pontiac G8, fourth generation Pontiac GTO, Pontiac Solstice/Saturn Sky, and the upcoming Cadillac Converj (now called the ELR).
 
One of Lutz's most famous "babies", however, has been the Chevrolet Volt. He has been an ardent supporter of the plug-in hybrid, so it should come as no surprise that Lutz is coming to the Volt's defense after a barrage of negative press has rained down on it.


[Source: Patrick Arena/VW Vortex]
 
Lutz, writing in a column for Forbes, went straight after those that have been most critical of the Volt. He rattled off six “truths” about the vehicle including the fact that the Volt was conceived before GM's federal bailout and that no Volt has caught fire on public roads during an accident. Lutz also asserted that 278,000 gasoline-engined vehicles caught fire between 2003 and 2007, but no one seemed to launch an attack campaign against those vehicles.
 
But Lutz saved his harshest criticism for the "right-wing media" which has gone after the Volt with many a hollow-point bullet:
 
But the Oscar for totally irresponsible journalism has to go to The O’Reilly Factor on Fox News, with, as its key guest, Lou Dobbs. Amid much jocular yukking, the Volt was depicted as a typical federal failure. In attempting to explain why Chevy has sold fewer than 8,000 Volts, Dobbs states, flatly, “It doesn’t work.” He elaborates, “It doesn’t go fast and go far on electricity. What happens is it catches fire."
 
Lutz then went on to try to clear up any confusion about who enabled the $7,500 tax credit that has been another sore point for people upset over the very existence of the Volt:
 
To top it off, these two media pros lamented the fact that the same government that had forced GM to produce the Volt was now extending $7,500 tax credits towards its purchase, thus squandering even more of “our taxpayer” dollars on this failed Socialist-collectivist flop. Truth? The $7,500 tax credit was enacted under the Bush administration!
 
Lutz’s column comes just days after GM CEO Dan Akerson testified before Congress to defend the Volt's safety record. "The Volt is safe. It's a marvelous machine. It represents so much of what is right at GM and, frankly, American ingenuity and manufacturing," said Akerson in his testimony last week. "The Volt seems, perhaps unfairly, to have become a surrogate for some to offer broader commentary on General Motors' business prospects and administration policy."
 
Late last week, GM introduced a new commercial to put the Volt in a more positive light.

Source: Forbes



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By retrospooty on 2/1/2012 7:13:45 AM , Rating: 1
"A Republican will take an idea and look at it from a grade school point of view and ask why this and that but never care to get an answer or clarify their opinion with real facts."

This is mostly true, especially when it comes to Fox news and the right wing blog-o-sphere... But the left does it too.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Kurz on 2/1/2012 4:19:13 AM , Rating: 2
I would say the Left does it more often.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Samus on 2/1/2012 4:44:53 AM , Rating: 2
That would be your oppinion Kurz, but the fact is all media is biased. Fox has cornered their market with a loyal following, something no liberal media has yet achieved. Because of this, it appears liberal media is further biased because there are more oppinions from more sources.

In reality it is important to hear all sides, however extreme they are. Jason Mick writes some very conservative-feeling oppinions (my perspective) but I still read, and agree with them quite often when I have traditionally been quite liberal.

Back on topic, I agree with Lutz. GM is attacked far too often. Yes they took a bailout, but so did Chrysler, and they have little chance of long-term survival. GM is actually selling cars (at a profit) and have been slowly paying back government loans. I'm a Ford guy but I wouldn't hesitate to put my kids in a Chevy Cruze or Chevy Sonic, both very attractive, safe cars. Without government bailout, these cars would never have come to market, and chances are GM will pay back their loan, unlike wallstreet who is still completely unwilling to work with home owners to refinance upside-down mortgages and still reaps record earnings at our expense.

We didn't HAVE to bail GM out, but odds are if we didn't, it would have sent shockwaves through the industry. Delphi, Bosch, Delco, Good Year, all heavily dependant on or owned by GM, would have been nearly shuttered if the worlds second-largest (at the time) auto manufacture disappeared. Nobody had the resources to purchase these supply chains. Imagine if Toyota had transitioned exclusively to Denso when the 2011 tsunami literally shut down Denso factories for months. Without Delco to backup Toyota for fuel injectors, solenoids and motors, Toyota would have been more screwed than they already were. Ford, Toyota and Volkswagen all depend on these suppliers for a variety of parts. The world-wide automotive industry would have suffered if GM were not bailed out, there is no arguement, unlike wether or not the federal wall street bailout had any effect whatsoever. The only arguement is why they haven't paid us back yet, and that has a lot to do with wall street not privatizing their loan with the government.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Samus on 2/1/2012 4:46:46 AM , Rating: 1
I can't believe Firefox changed my spelling of opinions...


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 10:02:39 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Fox has cornered their market with a loyal following, something no liberal media has yet achieved.


Of course because they're all competing for the same market share. The far left news market. Fox is the most balanced and offers a clear contrast to what EVERY OTHER network is doing. And if that means going to the right sometimes it's only seen as such a big issue because the other networks NEVER go to the right on anything ever.

Why do you think Fox's ratings are so big? Either the majority of this country is center-right. Or the other networks are too left leaning. It's probably a combination of both. I'm sure I could dig up a poll that would have the answer, but it would probably fall on deaf ears here.

I think these people have been in Liberal land so long, and been fed it so much on a daily basis, they can't really recognize Liberal bias when they see it. I once heard MSNBC's Chris Matthews call the Washington Post a "conservative" newspaper. Really Chris?? Conservative!

That just goes to show when you spend that much time on the left, ANYTHING that conflicts with your world view must be "far-right". You really lose the ability to tell one from the other objectively.

And honestly, this is America. Since when did being "right wing" become a bad thing? Oh yeah, since the Liberals in charge of print and broadcast media said so.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Samus on 2/1/2012 10:19:29 AM , Rating: 2
Well, to be honest, George W Bush didn't do the republican party any favors in the same way Bill Clinton didn't do the democratic party any favors, but GW's effects are "fresh." It'd be nice to have a real president in my lifetime (I'm 30.)

No arguement with your statement of the media, but you have to admit Fox takes a brute, tactless approach (think Glen Beck) every now and then that really opens up the doors to the liberal media (John Stewart, Steven Colbert, Paul Krugman.) They are so easy to slander because they are so big, and there is a liberal audience willing to listen. Since there are so many 'small' liberal media outlets, Fox rarely attacks them on a 1:1 basis, and instead has to talk about (relevent topics) the president, government malfunction, biased studies, etc. And that's why I still watch Fox. NPR, CNN and Fox all often have such over the top stories I have to turn them off.

It's really out of control. Everything is. Because as you said, people tune themselves to only hear what they want to hear (probably because of the environment they were raised in) and don't bother challenging what they listen too.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 11:42:36 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Well, to be honest, George W Bush didn't do the republican party any favors


You know what, he sure as hell didn't. Because Bush is somehow still thought of by people as a Conservative, when he clearly wasn't. And that hurts the Republican party and Conservatives when we have to constantly be compared to someone who was, frankly, a moderate President who was left leaning on a lot of issues. And we get put in uncomfortable positions where we end up defending Bush because our party is being attacked.

I think if 911 had never happened, we would be talking about his administration in a completely different light perhaps. But as of right now today, Bush probably hurt our party more than helped. Don't get me wrong, Democrats and Liberals are always going to hate us no matter what. It's just that Bush provided SO much ammo to them while also alienating those of us who wanted a true Conservative in the White House.

Or it could be that, much like Lincoln was, he was thrust into an impossibly perilous situation and it's going to take the next 40+ years to come to a historical consensus. The wounds might be a bit too fresh right now, so to speak.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Icebain on 2/1/2012 5:53:16 PM , Rating: 2
Conservative does not equal "Republican Party". Don't defend the party, defend the conservative ideals.

GWB was exactly what the left wanted. Someone who would kinda do what they wanted, and still made enough mistakes in order to scapegoat the party he associated with. The damage done to the conservative movement isn't fully realized yet, and I think it will come to fruition this election cycle. Once they can no longer claim, "BUSH DID IT AND HE WAS 'CONSERVATIVE' BLAH BLAH BLAH" with spending, Medicare Part B, No Child Left Behind etc., then real inroads can be made against the current establishment.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By JediJeb on 2/1/2012 10:35:44 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
And honestly, this is America. Since when did being "right wing" become a bad thing? Oh yeah, since the Liberals in charge of print and broadcast media said so.


From what I understand being "right wing" means you believe in the Constitution as it was written and that the government should have as little power as possible. If that is so then our Founding Fathers must have been "right wing" too. If so then I guess that is where I fall also. But honestly I prefer to take news from as many sources as possible and intelligently process the information to try and figure out what the truth really is.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/12, Rating: 0
RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Jeffk464 on 2/1/2012 10:57:48 AM , Rating: 2
"And honestly, this is America. Since when did being "right wing" become a bad thing? Oh yeah, since the Liberals in charge of print and broadcast media said so."

Since the start of the Revolutionary war. The idea that individuals had rights and weren't just the subjects of the elite were very liberal ideas at the time. Republicans always talk about freedom but what they mean is for Corporation to have freedom to do whatever they want. Republicans seem to be the ones always wanting to pass laws to restrict personal freedoms.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 11:46:59 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Republicans seem to be the ones always wanting to pass laws to restrict personal freedoms.


Care to give me some examples please? I know you're going to throw the Patriot Act in there, even though both parties virtually unanimously passed it. But what else you got?


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Schrag4 on 2/1/2012 1:01:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Republicans seem to be the ones always wanting to pass laws to restrict personal freedoms.


I think you aren't being intellectually honest. BOTH parties seem to exist, in my opinion, for the sole purpose of growing government and restricting freedoms. The only difference is WHICH freedoms they vote to restrict. And as Reclaimer has pointed out, there's a lot of overlap between the two parties (Patriot Act is an example).

Can you really not think of any individual liberties that the left wants to restrict?

quote:
Republicans always talk about freedom but what they mean is for Corporation to have freedom to do whatever they want.


Ok, so you're saying that the left wants to limit the freedoms that corporations have? How is that a good thing? What freedoms should individuals have that corporations shouldn't be allowed (since corporations are made up of regular people like you and me after all)?


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 1:09:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Ok, so you're saying that the left wants to limit the freedoms that corporations have? How is that a good thing? What freedoms should individuals have that corporations shouldn't be allowed (since corporations are made up of regular people like you and me after all)?


Oh man you said it now. Don't you know Daily Tech is home to the most rabid anti-Corporation lackeys this side of MoveOn.org?? Good luck my friend. I'll do what I can for ya...you'll need this.

*hands you flame retardant suit*


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 1:11:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Can you really not think of any individual liberties that the left wants to restrict?


Well aside from life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The Freedom of Speech, etc etc. Nope. Can't think of a one :)


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By rocketbuddha on 2/1/2012 12:09:22 PM , Rating: 2
Add to it Ford was begging the Gvmnt to prevent GM and Chrysler bankruptcy.. Why? Because if the other 2 had gone bankrupt, the suppliers would likely default the payments to Ford disrupting Ford's supply chain.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By YashBudini on 2/1/2012 4:25:51 PM , Rating: 2
Keeping GM and Chrysler alive means that Ford is much further away from doing anything that could possibly be misconstrued as anti-trust. Fighting anti-trust accusations is very expensive in court, whether they are real or Faux accusations.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Black1969ta on 2/1/2012 10:43:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Without government bailout, these cars would never have come to market, and chances are GM will pay back their loan, unlike Wallstreet who is still completely unwilling to work with home owners to refinance upside-down mortgages and still reaps record earnings at our expense.


That is key right there, people say that Volt was stupid to release and it was totally funded by the government bailout, Which was announced Dec 19th, 2008, so that was before Obama took office in January of 2009! By then GM had already spent Million on the Volt/Converj project, by the time of the bailout, GM would have lost more money by scrapping the program than by releasing a flop.

Second, the EV market is growing and will continue to grow, number may not be very high as far as sales but they do sell all they make, by Volt 2.0 the Volt will be a very strong competitor to the Prius(s).

Third GM didn't need bailed out from a cash and poor management situation, GM needed bailed out of its Union situation, you look at Automotive Union pay-rates vs. inflation, and those Union have demanded higher and higher wages to the point of near if not hyperinflation, hyperinflation cannot be sustained, something had to be done and the loss of thousands of Auto manufacturer jobs, along with thousands of auto supplier jobs along with thousands of natural resource jobs, added to the thousands of dealership level jobs, adding in the Hundred of thousands of service industry jobs and well if you don't get the idea yet you never will.
I support GM, still sore about cancelling the Firebird, but still support them and all the men and women who have to suffer thru the idiots that treat GM and its employees like its a political whipping boy.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/2/2012 10:12:47 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Third GM didn't need bailed out from a cash and poor management situation, GM needed bailed out of its Union situation, you look at Automotive Union pay-rates vs. inflation, and those Union have demanded higher and higher wages to the point of near if not hyperinflation, hyperinflation cannot be sustained, something had to be done and the loss of thousands of Auto manufacturer jobs, along with thousands of auto supplier jobs along with thousands of natural resource jobs, added to the thousands of dealership level jobs, adding in the Hundred of thousands of service industry jobs and well if you don't get the idea yet you never will.


The bailout didn't fix this problem. In fact Obama made it worse. Unions are a huge contributor to Democrat's in general. But Obama especially got huge amounts of campaign contributions from the UAW and other Unions. He actually gave the UAW shares of GM, a move which I must point out, is actually illegal.

This is why people like me are so angry about GM, the Volt, the whole thing. We see our President using billions of dollars of public money to pay back the unions blatantly, engage in crony capitalism, everything. The whole thing stinks of corruption and greed and selfishness. It's everything that's wrong with politics and big government.

The UAW is not only stronger than before, but they have an actual leadership stake in GM itself! He bailed out the pension plan that was killing GM, like you said. He gave them shares. He put union members on GM's board of directors for god sakes. Do you realize what that means? He handed GM to the unions. Things will never change for the better now.

And before any of you people say "Hey, Obama himself didn't do all that". Remember his "Car Czar"? That's right. Someone appointed by Obama, unanswerable to everyone - even Congress - completely above the law carrying out Obama's expressed orders. Obama DID do all those things.

What happens when the money runs out and GM is facing the same union-driven problem years down the road? They had a real chance to restructure.

quote:
Second, the EV market is growing and will continue to grow, number may not be very high as far as sales but they do sell all they make, by Volt 2.0 the Volt will be a very strong competitor to the Prius(s).


Provided Obama keeps the price of gas and EV subsidies high as hell?

I say enough of the Government picking winners. If the EV market grows, let it grow on it's own. Let Capitalism play out as it should. Purposefully manipulating markets and inflating the cost of gas is NOT the way to do it.

In closing, the Obama administration has a clear and present vested interest in the success of the Volt. A car. Is this something you honestly feel should be the role of our government and President?

And as far as Lutz and his rant goes, he can just suck on this.
http://nlpc.org/stories/2012/02/01/answers-and-que...


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Black1969ta on 2/18/2012 4:47:09 AM , Rating: 2
How did Obama make this worse when "Obama" was not in office in December 2008?

quote:
He actually gave the UAW shares of GM, a move which I must point out, is actually illegal.


It has been almost 2 years since the restructure, if this was illegal, name and link the court case.

quote:
The UAW is not only stronger than before, but they have an actual leadership stake in GM itself! He bailed out the pension plan that was killing GM, like you said. He gave them shares. He put union members on GM's board of directors for god sakes. Do you realize what that means? He handed GM to the unions. Things will never change for the better now.


I don't see the UAW owning part of GM as a bad thing. The UAW had GM by the "Balls" before, now they have a vested interest in what benefits GM as a whole; whereas, before UAW only cared about benefiting UAW.

Don't get me wrong I am not Pro-Union, I think when founded they were very useful in balancing power between the capitalist giants and individual workers, but now laws do most of that for us. Unions are antiquated now.

As for the Auto Czar, he does answer to the president, his sole purpose was to ensure that the minute details of allocating the bailout money authorized by H.W. Bush did not steal too much of Obama's time and focus.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By retrospooty on 2/1/2012 10:13:27 AM , Rating: 2
"I would say the Left does it more often."

Both do, I would put it this way specifically.

The left: Look at things from a left point of view and never care to get an answer or clarify their opinion with real facts

The Right: Look at things from a grade school point of view and never care to get an answer or clarify their opinion with real facts


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Samus on 2/1/2012 10:21:55 AM , Rating: 2
Sometimes a grade-school point of view is all it takes. A lot of accomplishment can be achieve when you break down a topic into its simplest form.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Kurz on 2/1/2012 10:26:51 AM , Rating: 2
Grade School point of view? What do you mean by that?


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Samus on 2/1/2012 11:34:49 AM , Rating: 2
Something even a child can understand.

A lot of media sensationalizes even the simplest topics with unneccessary complexity and moot information. This approach might appear intelligent, but anyone who can read between the lines will know its just an "inception" scripted story; that is, too much information.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 12:17:42 PM , Rating: 2
That's true. I think a lot of the reason Liberals are made out to be "smarter" than Conservatives is that it truly takes a brilliant intellect to make such terrible ideas and theories sound like a good idea to average people.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By retrospooty on 2/1/2012 1:16:02 PM , Rating: 2
See George Bush and Sarah Palin for dozens of examples. See Arizona's ignorant immigration policies as other examples.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Kurz on 2/2/2012 9:08:59 AM , Rating: 2
You think I subscribe to them and believe in everything they preach?

Arizona has a problem with illegals, They are trying their best to control the problem. It is against the law to enter this country illegaly, they are just fullfiling the law.

Though you still didn't answer the question.
You just finger pointed and disagreed with what state holds on a specific issue.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 11:58:38 AM , Rating: 2
LOL Retro, you have a gift. This was subtle humor right? Because you just posted something that uses grade school logic to attack "the right" on having a grade school point of view.

Bravo man :D

Seriously now, I would say the fault in the "both sides do it" point of view is that it assumes a morale relativism. If both sides can't be wrong, that means both can never be right. And visa versa.

Conservatism, the "right", what have you isn't just some point of view. In the larger context of politics and the impact on the country, it absolutely is the CORRECT point of view. It's what this country was founded on.

Liberals don't like hearing this because they view America as a critically flawed venture that breeds inequalities, prejudices, and has a Constitution which was written to keep "rich white men" in power. So we need to take as much freedom, personal responsibility, and wealth out of the people's hands and use it equally and favorably distribute it to fix these issues. Now, obviously, we know this cannot be the correct point of view. It's just not.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By retrospooty on 2/1/2012 1:23:41 PM , Rating: 2
"Seriously now, I would say the fault in the "both sides do it" point of view is that it assumes a morale relativism. If both sides can't be wrong, that means both can never be right. And visa versa."

Can you see it ever working out with the current left vs. right, arguing and getting nowhere mentality? Both sides are wrong.

"Conservatism, the "right", what have you isn't just some point of view. In the larger context of politics and the impact on the country, it absolutely is the CORRECT point of view. It's what this country was founded on."

Who are you to say what is "correct" ? There are many opionions, I think we both agree our country is in a bad way right now, well, the reps have had most of the control in recent history, so how "correct can it be?

Also, this country was not founded by conservatives. This country was founded by people getting on boats and sailing the hell away from the conservatives of their day (The king of englands etc.)


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 2:45:25 PM , Rating: 2
You really needed to bring it, and you didn't. Really weak reply. Republicans might have been in power, but that doesn't mean they were CONSERVATIVE Republicans. And we could debate all day long over which party is responsible for what, regardless of voting "power".

Modern-day Conservatives embrace the ideology of our Founders. I didn't say America was settled by modern day Conservatives. Talk about grade school logic! It seems to be all you have.

Liberals, on the other hand, believe in NONE of our founding principles or the Constitution in general.

quote:
Who are you to say what is "correct" ?


Who are you to say I'm not? I'll err on the side of liberty and personal freedom and smaller government.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By retrospooty on 2/1/2012 3:31:29 PM , Rating: 2
"Republicans might have been in power, but that doesn't mean they were CONSERVATIVE Republicans."

OK, so when your conservative party fails miserably, then the claim is "they weren't REAL conservatives" LOL... OK. thanks for the laugh. Its a cop-out answer and a great way to remove all responsibility for actions. LOL.

"Liberals, on the other hand, believe in NONE of our founding principles or the Constitution in general."

Now you are generalizing and totally incorrect. Just ridiculous. Just because the liberal half of the USA disagrees with you doesn't at all mean they don't believe in the constitution. That is a total load of crap.

"You really needed to bring it, and you didn't. Really weak reply."

Right back at ya. Your arguments are totally baseless, and DONT assume to think you know what "liberals" think about the constitution, because you have no clue.

"Who are you to say I'm not?"

I am no-one to say that... But I didn't make the claimdid I? You came out and said conservatism is the "correct" way to govern. I pointed out that reps have had all the power in the modern ERA and have made a mess. You have no answer for that other than "oh, well, they werent REAL conservatives. If the reps aren't the conservative party who the hell is?

I am not touting the greatness of the dems by any means, but you really have to get over this "blame everything that is wrong in this country on liberals" thing. Its just narrow, one sided, ill-though out and plain wrong.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/12, Rating: 0
RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By retrospooty on 2/1/2012 4:28:49 PM , Rating: 3
"you're on ignore too. Come back when you grow up, start paying taxes, and have more of a clue about realities instead of just idealistic platitudes."

Nice... clearly I disagree with you, so I must be immature and pay no taxes... Just like all "librals". Your so imbalanced and prejudiced that its not even funny.

You have no argument, no comeback and no grounds to stand on, so yes, put me on ignore so you can claim the high road. Really classy. I am the immature one.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By YashBudini on 2/1/2012 4:29:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
put me on ignore so you can claim the high road.

Why would he treat you different than anyone else?


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By retrospooty on 2/1/2012 4:40:07 PM , Rating: 3
"Why would he treat you different than anyone else?"

I guess thats how it is... Attack the librals at all cost, its ALL their fault, its all their fault!!! . Then, when confronted with irreputiatable logic (/Palin LOL),like the fact that the reps have had nearly all the power in the past 30 years, run like a coward and insult me. He cant admit he is wrong and that the reps screwed this pooch. Clearly you and I must be nutty liberals and pay no taxes.

I live in AZ, am married with 2 kids, one going to ASU now, and own 2 homes, but clearly, I pay no taxes and am immature because I dont blame all our issues on the liberals.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/12, Rating: 0
RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By retrospooty on 2/1/2012 5:08:46 PM , Rating: 3
"and still defend Liberalism."

This is why a true conversation cannot be had with you. I am NOT defending liberalism. I am simply stating you cant blame it ALL on the liberals, when the reps have had all the power. You are so far to one side you cant even comprehend someone that disagrees with you and consider for just a minute that they arent a liberal nutjob. THINK about that statement for a minute. Where did I defend liberalism? All I ever do is point out how one sided and incorrect you are for blaming everything on the libs.


"I really hope you didn't think this discussion was about saying "everything" isn't the Liberals fault. In that case I'll be REALLY pissed for you wasting my time. Because you can't find me saying that here at all. Not once. "


Lets not mince words here reclaimer. Your name is littered all over any and every political article and Anandtech/Dailytech for YEARS blaming everything on the liberals. That's all you do. YOu cant fathom for a minute just maybe your side made most of the bad choices here. Not even a possibility is it. Its as if All Presidential legislation happened under Clinton, and in since Jan 2007 in Congress. Seriously, get some perspective.

If you truly arent going to "ignore" me, at least come up with a decent argument, becasue as of now you are failing.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 5:19:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
This is why a true conversation cannot be had with you. I am NOT defending liberalism. I am simply stating you cant blame it ALL on the liberals


So you aren't defending Liberals, you're just anti-me. That's MUCH better.

quote:
That's all you do.


That's not fair at all! I bash Apple too! Some of my best work has been in that field :)

Anyway you're just projecting. I never said "everything" bad is because of Liberals. Just that ALL of their ideas are.

quote:
Seriously, get some perspective.


Confidence and being self assured beats perspective any day. Ask your wife. It's damned sexy.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By retrospooty on 2/1/2012 5:29:57 PM , Rating: 2
"So you aren't defending Liberals, you're just anti-me. That's MUCH better."

LOL, no, just anti-blame everything on the minority side. Its all of the govt, not 1/2, and defintely not the smaller 1/2

"That's not fair at all! I bash Apple too! Some of my best work has been in that field :)"

Hey, I am right there with you on that! =)


"Confidence and being self assured beats perspective any day. Ask your wife. It's damned sexy. "


Ah yes, but I have both and the wifey is lovin it! ;)


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By YashBudini on 2/1/2012 5:59:11 PM , Rating: 2
"That's not fair at all! I bash Apple too! Some of my best work has been in that field :)"

Anyone else doing the exact same thing would be called a troll.

Got double standards?


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By retrospooty on 2/1/2012 7:03:57 PM , Rating: 2
Apple does a lot of crappy things that are very bashable. From the bold face lies and skewed benchmarks of the 90's and early 2000's to todays frivolous lawsuits claiming other companies are copying Apple's copied tech... But that's another thread.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Black1969ta on 2/1/2012 11:11:04 PM , Rating: 3
Funny story!!
Google Whig party and look at the wiki for that party, replace Whig with modern Republican, newspapers with FOX and names for the person modern equivalent position IE... Obama for Jackson, Gingrich for Clay, and you have the same story we do now!
History repeats itself!

Reclaimer, you forget that the earliest party was the democrat-republican, and they focus on almost opposite what we consider to be the modern Republican Point of View


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By YashBudini on 2/1/2012 9:09:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
you're on ignore too

Which apparently is accomplished by replying to all my posts addressed to you or not.

That's pretty impressive, few people can raise hypocrisy to an art form. Oh, it was a Faux ignore. Me silly.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By YashBudini on 2/1/2012 4:19:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
but you really have to get over this "blame everything that is wrong in this country on liberals" thing. Its just narrow, one sided, ill-though out and plain wrong.


"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." - Sinclair Lewis


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By YashBudini on 2/1/2012 4:41:11 PM , Rating: 2
All the pundits on Faux do the same thing, if information is forthcoming that is contrary to the goal then it's "LA LA LA LA LA I can't hear you time."

For a lot of people out there, this here is the truth.
Cause if it's on news channel it must be true:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel_cont...

Gotta love the Photoshopped images, what other stations do that?


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By KCjoker on 2/1/2012 6:38:20 PM , Rating: 2
The left are the grade school mentality....instead of debating issues they just call you a racist or show ads pushing old ladies over cliffs. Heck even Newsweek a magazine that used to be respected resorts to calling people that don't like Obama's policies "dumb".


"Intel is investing heavily (think gazillions of dollars and bazillions of engineering man hours) in resources to create an Intel host controllers spec in order to speed time to market of the USB 3.0 technology." -- Intel blogger Nick Knupffer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki