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 Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 4:36:06 AM , Rating: 4
LOL oh yeah, cause you know, nobody else takes people out of context at all. Certainly not the mainstream left media, who invented that tactic decades before Fox News was created. Come on, you know that happened DAILY when Bush was in office.

I think it was pretty stupid of them to use that part of Obama's statement. When right before it he handed them a real gem in that he blatantly lied when he said the Bush tax cuts increased taxes for "all" American's. That's a lie and they should have ran with it.

quote:
That other channels decided to pick it up as well? Really, some of these other channels simply could not have enough news to stay in business if not for Faux.


There isn't enough news out there to keep a 24/7 News network busy. I think one of the worst things that's happened to TV news in general is the 24 hour platform. Because they have to create so much content, recycle, or focus on self-creating news stories.

But blaming Fox for this? Fox Only got started in 1996 Yash. This practice had been going on for decades before.

But I know. It's easier to attack Fox than to ask ourselves why the Volt just isn't working for the consumer. GM didn't bring the EV1 to market because they knew this would happen. Who do you guys blame when the Volt gets the axe?


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 4:41:43 AM , Rating: 5
How about using a natural disaster to bash Bush?

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/01...

Even Jon Stewart has a limit on how far to the left he'll go. MSNBC sure doesn't.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Jeffk464 on 2/1/2012 10:48:21 AM , Rating: 3
Tax cuts that are not paid for through cuts do increase taxes for the public down the road. You and up paying for the money plus interest.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Jeffk464 on 2/1/2012 10:48:57 AM , Rating: 2
end


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 11:28:57 AM , Rating: 4
Yes but it's just not accurate to say "The last guy raised your taxes". That's rhetoric. It's JUST as accurate to say Obama "raised" our taxes because of the massive debt he's put us in that will have to be addressed at some point in the future. Using your logic.

It's understood that when you say "raised taxes" you mean the current tax rate. Not some point in the future that may or may not happen.

If that Youtube clip is accurate and unedited, Fox was clearly being dishonest by taking Obama's speech out of context. But if Yash is saying Fox isn't balanced by showing a half truth, than I'm saying that NOBODY is. Because every single network has been doing that since before I was born.

Yash seems to think "Fair and balanced" means you can't ever take the Conservative view on something. And that's just absurd. From what I can tell Fox is the most balanced when it comes to allowing the other side to give their opinion. Fox routinely gets real Democrats to give their point of view on issues. When's the last time MSNBC and the rest had anything other than a token Republican who's job was to sit there and get barraged by one-sided attacks?


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By YashBudini on 2/1/2012 11:43:17 AM , Rating: 2
The Economist is a perfectly legitimate, informative, professional, and enjoyable conservative read.

So much for your Faux theories. I didn't realize paranoia was a by-product of years of drug abuse.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 12:03:02 PM , Rating: 3
The Economist is not a news network, or even a newspaper, with a significant market share in America. Or any other country. I don't know why you keep bringing it up when the topic of discussion is Fox News.

And I'm suffering from years of drug abuse now? You usually throw the first low blow, but that one doesn't even make sense. So I must be on crack to be a Conservative? Who's being fair and balanced now.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By YashBudini on 2/1/2012 12:07:08 PM , Rating: 1
The fact that the Economist has no significant market share is a testament to the right's burning desire for a truthful and legitimate news outlet.

The other part was a reference to your own admittance of drug abuse. Or will your faux memory prevent that?

quote:
So I must be on crack to be a Conservative?


I can always rely on your to come to the faux conclusion.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 12:22:10 PM , Rating: 4
LOL and there you go again.

This time I'm just going to ignore you. I've said everything to you I've needed to. I've beaten you again. Score another one for the good guys.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By YashBudini on 2/1/2012 4:22:31 PM , Rating: 2
Here we see how it's possible for the police to investigate an auto collision, question half a dozen eye witnesses, and end up with six totally different accounts of what actually happened.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By ekv on 2/1/2012 10:05:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The Economist is a ... conservative read.
Nnnnnnhhh. And there goes our tacky-buzzer. Will have to call you out on that one. Good grief, even Wikipedia labels them as progressive adherents of economic Liberalism, holding to Keynesian principles when it suits them. Hardly conservative.

Methinks you likely consider the DPRK an ideal model for Obama to follow, with your "Faux News" jibes and asinine personal attacks. What next, put the Republicans and Christians in the concentration camps? But then, that's fits perfectly with your Liberal version of Tolerance. 'Hell, they're alive ain't they? ... that's tol'able enuf.' [/sarcasm off]

The Volt is a p.o.s. Though instead of hiring 100 engineers to make it better, or 100 lobbyists to change the laws, Lutz the klutz goes on a PR campaign. Wonder how much he's kissing BHO's ass?


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By voronwae on 2/1/2012 7:18:04 PM , Rating: 2
Borrowing money from China to pay for tax cuts does, in fact, just end up increasing taxes later. We get to pay it all back with interest now.


"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen














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