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 Keeir on 2/1/2012 3:32:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Folks, this is not football. We cannot have blind favoratism for our "teams" just because we grew up with them or whatnot.


That is very funny comment coming in the same post as:

quote:
My question to anyone that votes Republican is why? This question really bothers Democrats as we cannot understand why anyone would do so. I know I am may be asking for much, but could you please give an answer without mentioning the other side?


and following this:

quote:
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.


I'll take a stab here

quote:
Can you guys just give some good examples of what your party is doing to help YOU out?


Many people don't really think its the purpose of government to explicitly help themselves as much as possible. Or even the role of Government to step in whenever it might be helpful.

Some people think government should only be involved whenever it must be involved... when all other reasonable avenues are unfeasible.

For example, you talk about the Democratic party wanting to provide "healthcare" to people. The majority of proposals seem to center around removing middle earners choice about purchasing healthcare and stealing from high earners to pay for additional healthcare for individuals.

Left out of this discussion is that the federal government spent more than 25% of its budget in 2010 on healthcare! Yes that's right, the Federal Government alone spent more than 1 billion dollars on healthcare related items (Medicare, Medicade, VA, Health and Human Services, Medical Research Grants, etc, etc, etc). This of course ignores the additional money forgone in taxes for private spending on healthcare and charity healthcare. Yet we should spend -more- on healthcare?

Personally, I'm going to vote for the Candidate that reflects my personal values the most. The US Government's current tax system takes in approx 3 billion each year. (Up to 4 billion could be collected, but tax breaks mostly to middle and lower income individuals in the form of mortgage interests, personal deductions, etc amount to hundreds of millions each year. Maybe people ought to remember this when they talk about "helping" the middle class) Current spending levels of ~4 billion clearly can not be maintained. I would never take a LOAN to provide for my neighbor. (Consider this, if you make 75,000 dollars a year, spend 100,000 dollars a year, and have debt of 300,000 dollars... would you take additional loans?)

The first candidate that promises to RAISE taxes and LOWER spending will get my full support. In the mean time, if it was me in the position of the Federal Government, I would LOWER spending first. Given that all candidates are going to RAISE spending, I will have to vote for the candidates I feel will RAISE spending the least.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By sigmatau on 2/1/2012 4:38:27 PM , Rating: 2
So you vote for those that will hurt you the most too?

I'm still waiting for one freaking reason to vote Republican. Is it so hard? And your assessment is way off. Republicans are for way more intrusion than Democrats. This is another talking point from Fox News.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 4:59:55 PM , Rating: 2
Jesus Christ you really are that stupid aren't you? The guy answered your question politely, comprehensively, and eloquently. And when it gets to you, it's like it hit a brick wall of stupid.

Please go back to 4Chan or wherever you got here from. You just do not have the intelligence or maturity to be talking about this topic. You seriously cannot grasp that voting isn't about what politicians can "do" for us!?

"Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country"


John F Kennedy (a goddamn Democrat!)


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By YashBudini on 2/1/2012 5:01:28 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You usually throw the first low blow,


Really?

quote:
Jesus Christ you really are that stupid aren't you?


And that's just 1 today. If I knew I had to count them I would have brought along my 4 digit clicker.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By sigmatau on 2/1/2012 5:04:05 PM , Rating: 2
No idiot, he did not. Try again. If you guys can't give me one reason to vote for Republicans, then you are being just as stupid as when they try to evade questions like 2 year olds.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By cmdrdredd on 2/1/2012 6:41:36 PM , Rating: 2
If you need a reason to vote for someone you're too stupid to do any research on their beliefs and history.

You're just looking for the next handout. Admit it and move on. If I told you Mitt Romney would give you a personal check for $2,000 because you're a nice guy and you had reason to believe it you'd vote for him. If I told you he had moral values or that he will be able to turn the economy around by doing x, y, or z...you'd ignore it and say "you didn't give me a reason to vote republican". Enjoy the hope and change...it sure did well for everyone before. *roll eyes*


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By sigmatau on 2/1/2012 8:38:59 PM , Rating: 2
I guess you are the epitome of stupid since that is your candidate and you have no reason that you can give (without looking stupid) for voting for them.

Wow, I just found the paradox that kills Republican robots. I will make sure to use this in the future. So people that vote for Republicans are actually not voting for a candidate but maybe against the other one just for spite or some uneducated reason? I'm guessing because I can't tell at the moment.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Keeir on 2/1/2012 6:51:27 PM , Rating: 2
Sigmatau, if you can't see that voting for a candidate that most closely repersents your personal value system as a reason to vote "Republician", I don't think your in the position to be insulting others mental capacities.

While I vote neither Republician or Democratic per se, I can at least admit that some people in this world will find the social "conservatism" esponsed by many members of the Republician party as aligning closely with thier personal values. (This is an example of why someone would vote for the "Republician" stereotype you hold)

Your consistent denial of this self-evident truth of the world, well frankly, makes you seem little more than a selfish thief who wonders why people would see some of "preferences" of the Democratic party as negative.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By sigmatau on 2/1/2012 8:25:27 PM , Rating: 2
So no reason huh? Republicans are not conservatives. I'm not sure who came up with that idea.

I'm still waiting for you to explain to me how exactly Republicans "represents your personal value system". That was my original question. So you are for taking other people's rights away that you don't agree with, increasing taxes for the working class but lowering taxes for the upper class, and trying their hardest to pollute the world is your reason?

I really would rather you tell me, but whatever bro.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/2/2012 9:12:57 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
So no reason huh? Republicans are not conservatives. I'm not sure who came up with that idea.


They're a lot more Conservative than Democrats. I can actually name Conservative Republicans. Can you give me even ONE example of a Democrat who isn't a Liberal? Okay maybe Evan Bayh, but that's pretty much it.

There was once a term used for a sensible blue-blooded Democrat; "Reagan Democrat". Sadly, those don't exist anymore. The radical far-left movement has taken over the Democrat party. And that's not just me saying it, everyone is.

Anyway you sound like a 12 year old who asks questions about things he can't possibly understand the answers to. People have told you 10 times why they vote Republican, and you keep saying "but why tell me tell me bro" like an idiot.

quote:
So you are for taking other people's rights away that you don't agree with, increasing taxes for the working class but lowering taxes for the upper class


That's an absolute absurd attack. You aren't even TRYING now. Even Liberals are probably reading your posts with some embarrassment.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By sigmatau on 2/1/2012 8:31:37 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, and let me tell you how insane your reason is to vote for Republicans. You and another more flamboyant poster stated basically for "smaller government."

The Republicans are part of the government. So that is a nice paradox you wove yourself into. Also, the Republicans love big government when it comes to what they want. They want a bigger military, larger boarder patrol (even though Obama has increased it dramatically), and as much welfare for corporations. If that is not big government, then I don't know what is.

The Democrats have been passing consumer protection laws that prevent corporations from unfairly feeding of the poor and/or uneducated. If that is too intrusive for you then I can't help you.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2012 10:01:13 PM , Rating: 2
You just straight up hate Republicans and can't accept that any vote for one could possibly be legitimate.

You're a bigot, sir. And are embarrassing yourself.


RE: Typical Fox Uninformation
By YashBudini on 2/1/2012 10:59:26 PM , Rating: 2
Pot, meet keetle, kettle this is pot.


"A politician stumbles over himself... Then they pick it out. They edit it. He runs the clip, and then he makes a funny face, and the whole audience has a Pavlovian response." -- Joe Scarborough on John Stewart over Jim Cramer














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