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 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 :)


"Folks that want porn can buy an Android phone." -- Steve Jobs














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